Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #483333 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-01-08 03:48 +0000 |
| Last post | 2019-01-11 14:32 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 505 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Serbia is again dictatorship Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-01-08 03:48 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-07 20:23 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 01:05 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2019-01-08 11:11 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 03:57 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-01-08 19:17 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-09 01:28 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-08 19:00 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 08:20 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 18:37 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 18:40 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 08:04 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-09 07:28 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 07:29 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-09 09:39 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 07:54 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-09 10:11 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 08:30 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-09 11:14 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 09:21 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 10:10 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-09 12:35 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 11:44 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 12:16 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 12:47 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-09 15:25 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 13:31 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-09 17:58 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 15:22 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship pothead <stonersimpleasthat@gmail.org> - 2019-01-09 23:22 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-09 19:34 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 18:47 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-09 16:32 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship pothead <stonersimpleasthat@gmail.org> - 2019-01-09 23:19 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-09 20:35 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 18:00 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 08:56 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 09:09 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 08:23 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 09:03 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 08:39 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-10 07:36 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Nobody you know <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2019-01-10 09:14 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-10 11:56 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 14:42 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-09 14:18 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 14:35 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 15:52 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 16:09 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 16:26 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-09 19:32 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-09 18:53 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 19:15 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 19:18 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-09 19:45 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 20:03 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-09 20:38 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 05:08 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-10 11:53 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 09:10 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-10 13:03 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 13:40 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 14:02 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 21:07 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 05:08 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 07:27 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 06:47 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 19:49 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 05:08 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 07:29 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 16:10 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-09 19:33 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-10 08:07 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 06:31 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 07:26 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 08:47 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 07:51 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-11 12:29 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-11 14:51 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 13:14 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-11 13:56 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 14:17 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-11 22:32 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 14:33 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-11 18:03 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 15:10 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-11 16:16 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-11 20:35 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-11 18:39 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 14:40 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 15:03 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-11 16:51 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-12 10:57 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 14:08 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-12 18:21 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 16:38 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-13 00:42 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-14 07:24 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 06:38 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 07:10 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-14 09:26 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 07:44 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-14 09:45 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 17:16 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship PP <email2@lizards8912m.org> - 2019-01-14 22:20 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 07:23 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 05:47 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 08:43 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 08:16 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 08:35 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 08:46 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 09:57 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 10:35 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-14 12:49 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 11:23 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 12:22 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 12:41 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 13:56 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 14:30 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 14:41 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 11:03 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 11:11 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 11:51 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 13:08 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 12:02 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 12:53 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 13:00 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 13:24 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 14:10 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 14:36 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-15 04:11 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 06:30 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-15 06:47 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 07:04 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-15 08:14 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 08:45 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 09:09 -0800
My vice is better than yours. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-15 10:05 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 11:08 -0700
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 10:36 -0800
Give me your tired, your poor. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-15 12:18 -0800
Re: Give me your tired, your poor. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 13:19 -0700
Re: Give me your tired, your poor. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 12:50 -0800
Re: Give me your tired, your poor. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 12:34 -0800
Re: Give me your tired, your poor. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 12:46 -0800
Should a rich man ignore a bleeding man knocking on his door ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-15 20:56 -0800
Re: Should a rich man ignore a bleeding man knocking on his door ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 21:24 -0800
Re: Should a rich man ignore a bleeding man knocking on his door ? vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2019-01-16 09:41 +0000
Re: Should a rich man ignore a bleeding man knocking on his door ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 07:07 -0800
Re: Should a rich man ignore a bleeding man knocking on his door ? silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-17 12:02 -0500
Re: Give me your tired, your poor. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-17 06:57 -0700
Re: Give me your tired, your poor. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 18:28 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 13:37 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 17:46 -0500
Re: My vice is better than yours. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-16 07:23 -0600
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 07:20 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-17 07:03 -0700
My vice is better than yours. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-15 15:26 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 15:41 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 16:32 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 16:59 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 18:01 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-15 18:50 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-16 07:05 -0600
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 07:05 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-17 07:46 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 08:40 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-17 12:23 -0800
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 13:37 -0800
Who speaks for the poor ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-17 08:52 -0800
Re: Who speaks for the poor ? "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2019-01-17 11:57 -0500
Re: Who speaks for the poor ? silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-17 12:10 -0500
Re: 🔫🔫🔫⏰ POTENTIAL CLOCK TOWER SHOOTER ALERT! ⏰🔫🔫🔫 Sir Gerg teh Yechh Master ""Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake>" 🔫🔫🔫⏰ POTENTIAL CLOCK TOWER SHOOTER ALERT! ⏰🔫🔫🔫❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Who speaks for the poor ? ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-01-17 13:00 -0600
Re: 🔫🔫🔫⏰ POTENTIAL CLOCK TOWER SHOOTER ALERT! ⏰🔫🔫🔫 Sir Gerg teh Yechh Master ""Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake>" 🔫🔫🔫⏰ POTENTIAL CLOCK TOWER SHOOTER ALERT! ⏰🔫🔫🔫❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ Who speaks for the poor ? ❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄❄ Snowflake ❄ % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 12:24 -0700
Re: Who speaks for the poor ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 09:34 -0800
Re: Who speaks for the poor ? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-17 12:36 -0800
Re: Who speaks for the poor ? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-17 12:36 -0800
I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-17 13:37 -0800
Re: I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 14:02 -0800
Re: I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-17 14:30 -0800
Re: I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 15:40 -0800
Re: I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-17 18:56 -0700
Re: I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-19 04:27 -0800
Re: I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-19 04:54 -0800
Re: I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-19 08:08 -0800
Re: I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-20 20:26 -0800
Re: I'm not the least bit jealous of Warren Buffett. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-17 14:11 -0800
Democrats are rich scofflaws. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-17 08:10 -0800
Re: Democrats are rich scofflaws. Sir Gaygory's Owner's Owner 🐶笛 <root@127.0.0.1> - 2019-01-17 11:18 -0600
Re: My vice is better than yours. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-16 12:11 -0700
Re: My vice is better than yours. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 18:17 -0800
Children of rich parents are the worst tenants. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-15 22:14 -0800
Re: Children of rich parents are the worst tenants. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 22:42 -0800
Re: Children of rich parents are the worst tenants. -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-16 03:53 -0800
Re: Children of rich parents are the worst tenants. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-16 04:11 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-16 02:13 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 18:33 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 02:10 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-16 18:43 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 07:51 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-17 16:16 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 09:37 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-17 11:22 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 12:12 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-17 12:47 -0800
A family of 4, living in a 160 SqFt room, shared housing. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-17 14:59 -0800
Re: A family of 4, living in a 160 SqFt room, shared housing. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-18 08:59 -0800
Re: A family of 4, living in a 160 SqFt room, shared housing. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-18 10:09 -0700
Re: A family of 4, living in a 160 SqFt room, shared housing. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-18 10:39 -0800
Poverty is a vice, wealth is a vice, everything is vice. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-18 09:38 -0800
Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-20 18:19 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-20 18:51 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-21 07:14 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-21 09:51 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-21 08:06 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-21 10:49 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-21 09:04 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-21 19:14 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-22 07:32 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 13:51 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-22 08:04 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 19:08 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-22 14:50 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 12:58 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-23 03:16 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-22 20:04 -0500
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-23 08:00 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-23 15:04 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-23 09:39 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-23 16:09 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-23 10:32 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-26 07:45 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-26 16:23 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-01-26 16:28 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-26 16:30 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-26 08:40 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-26 16:44 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-26 08:48 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-01-26 19:19 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-26 12:14 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Amanda KoXXX <iscariot694me@simplivr4.org> - 2019-01-26 16:36 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-23 07:59 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-23 18:23 -0500
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-24 05:11 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-01-26 12:13 -0500
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-22 14:05 -0500
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-22 14:52 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-23 10:03 -0700
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-21 11:00 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-21 17:55 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Amanda KoXXX <iscariot694me@simplivr4.org> - 2019-01-21 22:01 +0000
"To Bork" ( to fuckup ) refers to the "Swedish Chef" Muppet. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-21 15:23 -0800
Re: "To Bork" ( to fuckup ) refers to the "Swedish Chef" Muppet. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-21 23:37 +0000
Etymology of: " This website is borked ". Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-21 17:05 -0800
Re: Etymology of: " This website is borked ". owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-22 03:36 +0000
Re: Etymology of: " This website is borked ". Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-21 20:03 -0800
Re: Etymology of: " This website is borked ". vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2019-01-22 08:29 +0000
Re: Etymology of: " This website is borked ". Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 01:00 -0800
Re: Etymology of: " This website is borked ". owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-22 14:30 +0000
Re: Etymology of: " This website is borked ". Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 09:25 -0800
Re: Etymology of: " This website is borked ". vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2019-01-22 08:45 +0000
Re: Etymology of: " This website is borked ". Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 06:11 -0800
Re: Etymology of: " This website is borked ". owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-22 14:47 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Amanda KoXXX <iscariot694me@simplivr4.org> - 2019-01-21 21:59 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-21 14:19 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-22 07:05 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 05:41 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-22 13:48 +0000
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 09:15 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 09:35 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-22 14:37 -0500
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-22 11:55 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-01-21 16:35 -0500
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-22 07:41 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-22 14:38 -0500
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-23 10:04 -0700
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2019-01-23 12:16 -0500
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Sergi o <invaliid@invalid.com> - 2019-01-23 11:29 -0600
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-23 14:47 -0800
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-23 18:36 -0500
Re: Illegal immigrants are welcomed here. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-24 05:11 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-17 21:42 +0000
No one wants to be banished to the woods. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-17 14:05 -0800
Re: No one wants to be banished to the woods. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-18 04:24 +0000
Re: No one wants to be banished to the woods. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 20:50 -0800
Re: No one wants to be banished to the woods. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-18 09:16 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-17 14:25 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-17 15:41 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-17 23:54 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-18 05:05 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-18 05:26 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-18 13:50 +0000
Democrats are in the Caribbean, asking for margaritas. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-14 22:53 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 08:00 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-17 07:04 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-14 06:57 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 05:04 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 06:54 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 09:01 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 06:22 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 06:45 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 07:04 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 07:57 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 08:05 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-14 08:29 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 08:37 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-14 16:59 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-14 16:59 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship PP <email2@lizards8912m.org> - 2019-01-14 21:42 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-14 08:52 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Hadron Quark <hadronquark@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 16:00 +0100
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 17:04 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 14:12 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship PP <email2@lizards8912m.org> - 2019-01-14 22:17 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 08:04 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 10:06 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 08:10 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 16:47 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 07:15 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 08:56 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 08:14 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 10:11 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 09:35 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 11:10 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 08:23 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 13:04 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 12:06 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 13:11 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 12:24 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 17:44 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship pothead <stonersimpleasthat@gmail.org> - 2019-01-16 01:11 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 17:30 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-16 01:55 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-16 05:21 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 21:40 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 08:07 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 06:49 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 06:41 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-17 07:07 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 06:41 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-14 09:19 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 07:37 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-14 09:44 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 08:03 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-14 10:19 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 09:43 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-14 16:59 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship PP <email2@lizards8912m.org> - 2019-01-14 21:41 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 17:24 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-14 17:10 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 07:24 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 08:58 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 06:33 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 00:10 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 17:16 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-14 17:11 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 07:23 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 05:32 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 09:14 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 17:11 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 07:22 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 08:58 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 08:18 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 06:45 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 10:33 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 07:35 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 09:37 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 11:10 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 08:53 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-17 07:05 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 10:13 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 07:07 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-14 16:59 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 09:30 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 11:19 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 16:42 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 15:36 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 19:23 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 17:45 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-14 20:08 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 20:41 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-14 17:12 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 00:02 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 10:33 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 13:08 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 12:29 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 10:41 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-15 13:06 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-17 07:01 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 17:45 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-16 06:50 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-16 09:16 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-16 06:48 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-15 12:37 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-15 17:46 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 12:58 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 14:44 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-11 16:29 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 15:50 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-12 06:40 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-12 12:45 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 12:55 -0800
To properly document it, you'd need a better wall, with cameras. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-14 06:57 -0800
Re: To properly document it, you'd need a better wall, with cameras. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 17:51 -0500
See no vice, hear no corruption, speak no evil. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2019-01-14 06:23 -0800
Re: See no vice, hear no corruption, speak no evil. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 06:45 -0800
Re: See no vice, hear no corruption, speak no evil. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-14 16:59 +0000
Re: See no vice, hear no corruption, speak no evil. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 10:16 -0800
Re: See no vice, hear no corruption, speak no evil. PP <email2@lizards8912m.org> - 2019-01-14 21:37 +0000
Re: See no vice, hear no corruption, speak no evil. silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-14 11:01 -0500
Re: See no vice, hear no corruption, speak no evil. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 17:38 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-09 19:37 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-09 19:44 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-09 12:09 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-09 11:23 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-09 12:46 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 10:16 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 10:26 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 09:02 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-09 19:47 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-09 16:02 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 08:24 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-09 10:57 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-09 19:46 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 08:51 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-09 12:07 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 09:54 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 09:00 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 08:07 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 07:49 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 09:07 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-09 19:51 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 19:02 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-09 12:04 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-09 19:55 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-01-10 09:55 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 07:20 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-10 16:29 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 16:34 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-01-11 05:33 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-11 15:40 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-11 09:48 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-11 16:01 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-11 10:15 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-11 17:49 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-11 17:12 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 16:22 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 16:38 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-01-12 13:40 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2019-01-12 11:12 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 13:53 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 14:32 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-13 02:33 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 18:57 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-13 08:51 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-13 16:06 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-13 12:44 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-13 12:27 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-13 13:04 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-13 13:38 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-13 16:51 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-13 16:47 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 07:41 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-01-13 12:47 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-13 10:32 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2019-01-13 18:57 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-13 12:40 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2019-01-13 19:01 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-13 12:45 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-13 14:56 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 00:53 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-14 07:25 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 08:17 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-11 12:14 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 10:07 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-11 13:03 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-01-12 13:40 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 12:28 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-12 16:24 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 14:32 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 14:48 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-12 18:24 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-13 00:42 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-12 17:09 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-11 17:20 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-10 12:00 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2019-01-10 11:32 -0600
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-10 13:32 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 14:40 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 14:21 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-01-11 05:35 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 14:51 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 15:23 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2019-01-11 05:34 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 03:20 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-11 08:26 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 07:46 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 14:22 -0700
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2019-01-09 08:36 -0800
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-01-09 20:26 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship "F. Russell" <frussell@random.info> - 2019-01-09 21:11 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-01-09 21:14 +0000
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship silverslimer <silver@slim.er> - 2019-01-09 16:31 -0500
Re: Serbia is again dictatorship Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-10 09:03 -0700
Fake Snit News Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 14:32 -0800
Page 4 of 26 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 26 Next page →
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-10 13:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2102fbeb-37d6-49a8-9987-7aced4c9bb98@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483730 |
Slimer wrote: > -hh wrote: >>Similarly, the primary modes and rankings of smuggling of illegal drugs into >>the US is known ... and 95% of it isn’t by driving around a wall, or over/under >> a wall, etc. >> The increase in arrests is not the result of more being stopped but > the result of more trying to get in. That’s a claim. Where’s your proof? BTW, it is verifiable fact that the number of CBP agents has gone up, which implies more enforcement activity. > As for drug smuggling, it's clear that they can dig under... True, that is possible, but what percentage of the whole uses that modality? Less than 5%. > ...but Trump wants to slow the drug smuggling because he > knows that it is nearly impossible to stop. When you focus on only 5% of the problem’s modality, how are you going to slow it by more than 5%? -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-12 13:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <89c1e352-2395-46f5-8b86-5ff46cbce455@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483776 |
On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: > Slimer wrote: > > -hh wrote: > >>Similarly, the primary modes and rankings of smuggling of illegal drugs into > >>the US is known ... and 95% of it isn’t by driving around a wall, or over/under > >> a wall, etc. > >> > The increase in arrests is not the result of more being stopped but > > the result of more trying to get in. > > That’s a claim. Where’s your proof? > > BTW, it is verifiable fact that the number of CBP agents has > gone up, which implies more enforcement activity. That number having "gone up" doesn't equate to the number being what it needs to do the job as assessed by experts who are either in the field or are closely related to them. As to the kinds of activity it implies, we already know that not all of it is "enforcement": -- A 2015 report from an internal audit by a CBP corruption advisory panel suggested that corruption-related arrests of CBP personnel “far exceed, on a per capita basis, such arrests at other federal law enforcement agencies.” James Tomsheck, a former head of internal affairs at CBP, tells Quartz that the picture “could be far worse than what the arrest stats show." <https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2018/11/us-border-patrols-last-hiring-surge-invited-rise-corruption/152721/> -- The phrase “could be far worse than what the arrest stats show" should be a wake up call to you if you were truly interested in differentiating stats from reality (apparently, you're not). > > As for drug smuggling, it's clear that they can dig under... > > True, that is possible, but what percentage of the whole uses > that modality? Less than 5%. Again with this silliness... this number is ascertained largely by looking at arrest stats at ports of entry. Why is the concept of not being able to know what you can't possibly know so damn difficult for you? Things like 'estimates' go out the window all too often in Realityville. You act like every drug czar is sharing their books with the world.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-12 14:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3ccc124a-b461-4dd1-81a4-b1fc0400a9ba@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #484107 |
On Saturday, January 12, 2019 at 2:40:42 PM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 2:03:15 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: > > Slimer wrote: > > > -hh wrote: > > >>Similarly, the primary modes and rankings of smuggling of illegal drugs into > > >>the US is known ... and 95% of it isn’t by driving around a wall, or over/under > > >> a wall, etc. > > >> > > The increase in arrests is not the result of more being stopped but > > > the result of more trying to get in. > > > > That’s a claim. Where’s your proof? > > > > BTW, it is verifiable fact that the number of CBP agents has > > gone up, which implies more enforcement activity. > > That number having "gone up" doesn't equate to the number > being what it needs to do the job as assessed by experts who > are either in the field or are closely related to them. As to the > kinds of activity it implies, we already know that not all of it is > "enforcement": > > -- > A 2015 report from an internal audit by a CBP corruption advisory > panel suggested that corruption-related arrests of CBP personnel > “far exceed, on a per capita basis, such arrests at other federal law > enforcement agencies.” James Tomsheck, a former head of internal > affairs at CBP, tells Quartz that the picture “could be far worse than > what the arrest stats show." > > <https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2018/11/us-border-patrols-last-hiring-surge-invited-rise-corruption/152721/> > -- > > The phrase “could be far worse than what the arrest stats show" > should be a wake up call to you if you were truly interested in > differentiating stats from reality (apparently, you're not). > > > > As for drug smuggling, it's clear that they can dig under... > > > > True, that is possible, but what percentage of the whole uses > > that modality? Less than 5%. > > Again with this silliness... this number is ascertained largely by > looking at arrest stats at ports of entry. Why is the concept of > not being able to know what you can't possibly know so damn > difficult for you? Things like 'estimates' go out the window all > too often in Realityville. You act like every drug czar is sharing > their books with the world. Studying GnuPG... forever a beginner... I bet we have two different beliefs about Just Wondering. The content clearly is a bunch of Just Wondering-like crap. Which means... - One Smart Penny! http://www.5z8.info/stalin-will-rise-again_j3h5uj_nakedgrandmas.jpg http://jeff-relf.me/Cola_Regs.HTM Jonas Eklundh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-09 21:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <46c9b454-c792-4598-a943-6507e0f842fc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483653 |
On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 9:03:42 PM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 8:45:23 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: > > Steve Carroll wrote: > > > -hh wrote: > > >> Steve Carroll wrote: > > >> > Steve Carroll wrote: > > >> >> -hh wrote: > > >> >> > SC wrote: > > >> >> > > Here's another obvious question: Does it make more sense to > > >> >> > > confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) > > >> >> > > or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... > > >> >> > > that one can find 'economists' justifying *after* the fact? > > >> >> > > > >> >> > False dichotomy. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Several methods of debunking come to mind. For example, the current > > >> >> > CBP practices aren’t following the letter of the law, so they can’t be claimed > > >> >> > as a legal method, so abolishing this abuse is an option. > > >> >> > > >> >> As I didn't specify any methods it's moot... > > >> > > !> Incorrect, for you made an “either A *or* B” statement. > > > > > > Of course, because the answer is only one or the other and > > > it's obvious which one it is. > > > > Nope, because you didn’t make an “A or Not A”. You said “yellow or 7”. > > As you read it. > > > > There is no scenario where trying control immigration is done more > > > accurately than by doing so in a legally recorded manner, suggesting > > > otherwise is absurd. > > > > That statement still contains an implicit logical fallacy. Can’t you identify it? > > LOL! I'm sure you can write 40 paragraphs on how > analyzing data that you can't possibly have could > be more accurate than data you do have... you're > funny like that ;) > > > > Put another way: Your agenda is showing. > > > > Which is to develop policy based on objectivity instead of “know nothing” bias. > > Speaking of "know nothing", you're trying to analyze > data that doesn't exist (again). Tomorrow morning, go > down the hall and talk with the *real* 'numbers guy', > see if he can explain why this doesn't really work. Sandman Script-Troller can't get anything else to work, either. Klaus Schadenfreude created at least 20 KVMS in the last year or so. Without Linux that would not be possible. Perhaps you use it like Sandman Script-Troller. Do you not comprehend the use of proxies? BTW, I've already discussed that his use of "cult-like" to describe COLA denizens is name calling, since he's likening them to Mac users. Sandman Script-Troller is the result of the reality that Marxists have been employed to subvert teaching kids. It's not a coincidence that he is a witless Marxist. Time to blame Sandman Script-Troller! Generally, I would not call something like Sandman Script-Troller's posts an outright lie right up until you negate it (as you are here) and he responds with the a shifting of goal posts knowing he can't prove it. -- This broke the Internet http://www.5z8.info/php-start_GPS_tracking-user_j3m3lg_whitepower http://prescottcomputerguy.com Jonas Eklundh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-10 05:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <g9o2apForloU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #483653 |
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 8:45:23 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >> Steve Carroll wrote: >>> -hh wrote: >>>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>> -hh wrote: >>>>>>> SC wrote: >>>>>>>> Here's another obvious question: Does it make more sense to >>>>>>>> confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) >>>>>>>> or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... >>>>>>>> that one can find 'economists' justifying *after* the fact? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> False dichotomy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Several methods of debunking come to mind. For example, the current >>>>>>> CBP practices aren’t following the letter of the law, so they can’t be claimed >>>>>>> as a legal method, so abolishing this abuse is an option. >>>>>> >>>>>> As I didn't specify any methods it's moot... >>>> >> !> Incorrect, for you made an “either A *or* B” statement. >>> >>> Of course, because the answer is only one or the other and >>> it's obvious which one it is. >> >> Nope, because you didn’t make an “A or Not A”. You said “yellow or 7”. > > As you read it. > >>> There is no scenario where trying control immigration is done more >>> accurately than by doing so in a legally recorded manner, suggesting >>> otherwise is absurd. >> >> That statement still contains an implicit logical fallacy. Can’t you identify it? > > LOL! I'm sure you can write 40 paragraphs on how > analyzing data that you can't possibly have could > be more accurate than data you do have... you're > funny like that ;) > >>> Put another way: Your agenda is showing. >> >> Which is to develop policy based on objectivity instead of “know nothing” bias. > > Speaking of "know nothing", you're trying to analyze > data that doesn't exist (again). Tomorrow morning, go > down the hall and talk with the *real* 'numbers guy', > see if he can explain why this doesn't really work. > > > > What the hell is your point? You think we know nothing and say you do not care about the wall but then conclude Democrats are wrong to actually understand more about the situation than you say you do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-10 07:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g9p335F16jbU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #483653 |
On 1/9/19 9:03 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 8:45:23 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >> Steve Carroll wrote: >>> -hh wrote: >>>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>> -hh wrote: >>>>>>> SC wrote: >>>>>>>> Here's another obvious question: Does it make more sense to >>>>>>>> confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) >>>>>>>> or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... >>>>>>>> that one can find 'economists' justifying *after* the fact? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> False dichotomy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Several methods of debunking come to mind. For example, the current >>>>>>> CBP practices aren’t following the letter of the law, so they can’t be claimed >>>>>>> as a legal method, so abolishing this abuse is an option. >>>>>> >>>>>> As I didn't specify any methods it's moot... >>>> >> !> Incorrect, for you made an “either A *or* B” statement. >>> >>> Of course, because the answer is only one or the other and >>> it's obvious which one it is. >> >> Nope, because you didn’t make an “A or Not A”. You said “yellow or 7”. > > As you read it. And as you have no counter. You repeatedly push false dichotomies and other fallacies and then just dodge when called out on it. >>> There is no scenario where trying control immigration is done more >>> accurately than by doing so in a legally recorded manner, suggesting >>> otherwise is absurd. >> >> That statement still contains an implicit logical fallacy. Can’t you identify it? > > LOL! I'm sure you can write 40 paragraphs on how > analyzing data that you can't possibly have could > be more accurate than data you do have... you're > funny like that ;) > >>> Put another way: Your agenda is showing. >> >> Which is to develop policy based on objectivity instead of “know nothing” bias. > > Speaking of "know nothing", you're trying to analyze > data that doesn't exist (again). Tomorrow morning, go > down the hall and talk with the *real* 'numbers guy', > see if he can explain why this doesn't really work. You hear we should have an objective policy and you reject that. You want a policy based on emotion. Fair enough. -- 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 | 2019-01-10 06:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a74fbabb-cf06-4168-9f2d-21903345888f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483693 |
On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 7:27:54 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 1/9/19 9:03 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 8:45:23 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: > >> Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> -hh wrote: > >>>> Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>> Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>>> -hh wrote: > >>>>>>> SC wrote: > >>>>>>>> Here's another obvious question: Does it make more sense to > >>>>>>>> confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) > >>>>>>>> or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... > >>>>>>>> that one can find 'economists' justifying *after* the fact? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> False dichotomy. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Several methods of debunking come to mind. For example, the current > >>>>>>> CBP practices aren’t following the letter of the law, so they can’t be claimed > >>>>>>> as a legal method, so abolishing this abuse is an option. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As I didn't specify any methods it's moot... > >>>> > >> !> Incorrect, for you made an “either A *or* B” statement. > >>> > >>> Of course, because the answer is only one or the other and > >>> it's obvious which one it is. > >> > >> Nope, because you didn’t make an “A or Not A”. You said “yellow or 7”. > > > > As you read it. > > And as you have no counter. You repeatedly push false dichotomies and > other fallacies and then just dodge when called out on it. > > >>> There is no scenario where trying control immigration is done more > >>> accurately than by doing so in a legally recorded manner, suggesting > >>> otherwise is absurd. > >> > >> That statement still contains an implicit logical fallacy. Can’t you identify it? > > > > LOL! I'm sure you can write 40 paragraphs on how > > analyzing data that you can't possibly have could > > be more accurate than data you do have... you're > > funny like that ;) > > > >>> Put another way: Your agenda is showing. > >> > >> Which is to develop policy based on objectivity instead of “know nothing” bias. > > > > Speaking of "know nothing", you're trying to analyze > > data that doesn't exist (again). Tomorrow morning, go > > down the hall and talk with the *real* 'numbers guy', > > see if he can explain why this doesn't really work. > > > You hear we should have an objective policy and you reject that. You > want a policy based on emotion. Fair enough. > > > -- > 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> I am working on an idea which will be more than anything Just Wondering can do! Open source is only inexpensive if your time has no value. He inconveniences an entire group of people who have done nothing wrong, but that's a self-centered troll for you. What you and I care about isn't a factor. Any horrendously hopeless welfare receiver could easily do the same. BTW, I've already told him that his use of "herd" to describe honest people is name calling, since he's likening them to beef cattle. I shan't ask Just Wondering how any part of Flatfish's body tastes no matter how regularly Just Wondering kisses it. He is as incompetent as Just Wondering. -- E-commerce Simplified! http://bit.ly/2oNYRgv Jonas Eklundh Communication AB
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-09 19:49 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <bc7c99aa-b876-4b5b-b391-693118006dee@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483649 |
On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 8:15:08 PM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 7:54:01 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: > > Steve Carroll wrote: > > > Steve Carroll wrote: > > >> -hh wrote: > > >> > SC wrote: > > >> > > Here's another obvious question: Does it make more sense to > > >> > > confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) > > >> > > or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... > > >> > > that one can find 'economists' justifying *after* the fact? > > >> > > > >> > False dichotomy. > > >> > > > >> > Several methods of debunking come to mind. For example, the current > > >> > CBP practices aren’t following the letter of the law, so they can’t be claimed > > >> > as a legal method, so abolishing this abuse is an option. > > >> > > >> As I didn't specify any methods it's moot... > > > > Incorrect, for you made an “either A *or* B” statement. > > Of course, because the answer is only one or the other and > it's obvious which one it is. There is no scenario where trying > control immigration is done more accurately than by doing so > in a legally recorded manner, suggesting otherwise is absurd. > > Put another way: Your agenda is showing. It is obvious that all of them are not automated because some of them are keyed in to posts that occur in very specific ways which proves they are a response. Meaning someone is hand writing many of these. Rudy Canoza's posts are nothing but a meaningless brain dump. LibreOffice is only less expensive if your time has no value. Rudy Canoza and Steven Carroll both lie constantly and shamelessly and continue to do so. So no motivation in showing any further care or honor. Believe it or not, just recently Rudy Canoza was declaring himself the only "true Linux advocate", and claiming that "advocates" (in satire-quotes, who he also refers to as "the herd") are trying to rewrite LibreOffice from scratch. - I Left My Husband & Daughter At Home And THIS happened http://www.5z8.info/add-worm_z4r9qk_fakelogin http://www.5z8.info/dogs-being-eaten_g0w7hf_molotovcocktail Jonas Eklundh Communication AB
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-10 05:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <g9o2apForloU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #483649 |
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 7:54:01 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >> Steve Carroll wrote: >>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> -hh wrote: >>>>> SC wrote: >>>>>> Here's another obvious question: Does it make more sense to >>>>>> confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) >>>>>> or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... >>>>>> that one can find 'economists' justifying *after* the fact? >>>>> >>>>> False dichotomy. >>>>> >>>>> Several methods of debunking come to mind. For example, the current >>>>> CBP practices aren’t following the letter of the law, so they can’t be claimed >>>>> as a legal method, so abolishing this abuse is an option. >>>> >>>> As I didn't specify any methods it's moot... >> >> Incorrect, for you made an “either A *or* B” statement. > > Of course, because the answer is only one or the other and > it's obvious which one it is. There is no scenario where trying > control immigration is done more accurately than by doing so > in a legally recorded manner, suggesting otherwise is absurd. > > Put another way: Your agenda is showing. > So let us get rid of our promotion of a black market immigration system.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-10 07:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g9p369F16jbU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #483649 |
On 1/9/19 8:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 7:54:01 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >> Steve Carroll wrote: >>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>>> -hh wrote: >>>>> SC wrote: >>>>>> Here's another obvious question: Does it make more sense to >>>>>> confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) >>>>>> or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... >>>>>> that one can find 'economists' justifying *after* the fact? >>>>> >>>>> False dichotomy. >>>>> >>>>> Several methods of debunking come to mind. For example, the current >>>>> CBP practices aren’t following the letter of the law, so they can’t be claimed >>>>> as a legal method, so abolishing this abuse is an option. >>>> >>>> As I didn't specify any methods it's moot... >> >> Incorrect, for you made an “either A *or* B” statement. > > Of course, because the answer is only one or the other Or a million gray areas in the middle. > and > it's obvious which one it is. Before you said you did not care which way we go. Wall or no wall meant nothing to you. Now there is only one answer you think makes sense. > There is no scenario where trying > control immigration is done more accurately than by doing so > in a legally recorded manner, suggesting otherwise is absurd. > > Put another way: Your agenda is showing. Nobody is saying they do not care about border security or immigration. Your claim is based on your own lies. -- 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 | 2019-01-09 16:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <91a1bb25-b8d1-4f6f-8bc4-c3e6c4c58a8c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483624 |
On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 4:52:38 PM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 3:18:04 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: > > SC wrote: > > > Here's another obvious question: Does it make more sense to > > > confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) > > > or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... > > > that one can find 'economists' justifying *after* the fact? > > > > False dichotomy. > > > > Several methods of debunking come to mind. For example, the current > > CBP practices aren’t following the letter of the law, so they can’t be claimed > > as a legal method, so abolishing this abuse is an option. > > As I didn't specify any methods it's moot... the bottom line is you > either have control over immigration levels (because you're 'mostly' > stopping everything that is illegal) or you don't. The fact is, we *do* > have laws and those laws *can* be followed. You might as well be > arguing that *every* law we have is totally ineffective as a method... > but we know that isn't the case. > > > Second, the > > penalties for employers are known to be inadequate and weak, so raising > > the fines on businesses is an option too. > > Sure... but that's totally irrelevant to the point my question above > (as still seen in *this* post) is raising. Your first example tried to > stick to the point but this goes off the rails. > > > Third, there are policy changes > > and similar diplomacy actions which can be taken to decrease the foreign > > misery which is motivating emigration to the US which can also be exercised, > > and any many of these are likely cheaper than the cost of the Wall. > > Also totally irrelevant. > > > Similarly, on the illegal drug entry routine: they’re not driven across the desert > > but smuggled commercial shipments at existing checkpoints on highways. > > That means more/better cargo inspections, not building walls where they ain’t. > > Same as above. I have been around to figure out the depths of Rudy Canoza's indecency. At times, a make believe world is more valuable than facts. Jonas Eklundh created at least one major circus in the last year or so. I bet nobody else has ever done that. Now that nobody is speaking to Rudy Canoza, he's making it sound like he's proved he knows GIMP -- when in fact, people are just sick of his shit. -- Puppy Videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OffkiSAsYo8 Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-09 19:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g9np8jFn3hnU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #483624 |
On 1/9/19 4:52 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, January 9, 2019 at 3:18:04 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote: >> SC wrote: >>> Here's another obvious question: Does it make more sense to >>> confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) >>> or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... >>> that one can find 'economists' justifying *after* the fact? >> >> False dichotomy. >> >> Several methods of debunking come to mind. For example, the current >> CBP practices aren’t following the letter of the law, so they can’t be claimed >> as a legal method, so abolishing this abuse is an option. > > As I didn't specify any methods it's moot... the bottom line is you > either have control over immigration levels (because you're 'mostly' > stopping everything that is illegal) or you don't. False dichotomy. There is plenty of gray area of having some control but people, get this, bypassing systems. > The fact is, we *do* > have laws and those laws *can* be followed. You might as well be > arguing that *every* law we have is totally ineffective as a method... > but we know that isn't the case. We have broken laws in this area... akin to having a 100% sales tax. It creates a black market. We have a black market immigration system. >> Second, the >> penalties for employers are known to be inadequate and weak, so raising >> the fines on businesses is an option too. > > Sure... but that's totally irrelevant to the point my question above > (as still seen in *this* post) is raising. Your first example tried to > stick to the point but this goes off the rails. > >> Third, there are policy changes >> and similar diplomacy actions which can be taken to decrease the foreign >> misery which is motivating emigration to the US which can also be exercised, >> and any many of these are likely cheaper than the cost of the Wall. > > Also totally irrelevant. > >> Similarly, on the illegal drug entry routine: they’re not driven across the desert >> but smuggled commercial shipments at existing checkpoints on highways. >> That means more/better cargo inspections, not building walls where they ain’t. > > Same as above. > -- 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 | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-10 08:07 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <toje3e1de06ludbc8ul36n4a83b3ccke1h@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #483624 |
Steve Carroll wrote: >Sure... but that's totally irrelevant to the point my question above >(as still seen in *this* post) is raising Yeah, that's a badass "point", "Steve". "We would be better off, if everyone would follow the rules." Jeezuz. It's like arguing with a child. Only someone with the patience of -highhorse can even begin to address all of your idiocy and errors. Anyone disagree with me? Then you're an idiot, too. Responses deleted, unread. -- "No one is afraid of Chrome Books. They are a qualified disaster. No one give or take, wants one. They are too limited. They provide NO beneft over a reasonable netbook/laptop other than maybe saving a few quid." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quack
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-10 06:31 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <27b1c73d-0604-443a-ab4c-8830545a9d53@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483690 |
On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 7:07:16 AM UTC-7, chrisv wrote: > Steve Carroll wrote: > > >Sure... but that's totally irrelevant to the point my question above > >(as still seen in *this* post) is raising > > Yeah, that's a badass "point", "Steve". > > "We would be better off, if everyone would follow the rules." > > Jeezuz. It's like arguing with a child. > > Only someone with the patience of -highhorse can even begin to address > all of your idiocy and errors. > > Anyone disagree with me? Then you're an idiot, too. > > Responses deleted, unread. > > -- > "No one is afraid of Chrome Books. They are a qualified disaster. No > one give or take, wants one. They are too limited. They provide NO > beneft over a reasonable netbook/laptop other than maybe saving a few > quid." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quack No-one gets it, I am the one who figured it out. Klaus 'The Moron' Schadenfreude doesn't have any idea what he is sniveling about. At one point, Klaus 'The Moron' Schadenfreude said a COLA denizen was "obsessing" over him, which was identified as responding to any name he uses. Everyone is Klaus 'The Moron' Schadenfreude -- the oldest gag in the book. The content clearly is a bunch of randomized Klaus 'The Moron' Schadenfreude-like crap. Only glue sniffing would lead to that. The Mac has better scripting tools. Even Ubuntu runs better on it. No one who isn't just using you for wicked ends sees you as anything remotely close to respectable. You have few but yourself to blame for that. - One Smart Penny! https://youtu.be/qwb1Ez0GWMA https://youtu.be/E3m_i-x92D0 http://www.5z8.info/add-worm_z4r9qk_fakelogin Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-10 07:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <db4085bd-360e-4845-a501-0211cff808ac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483690 |
On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 7:07:16 AM UTC-7, chrisv wrote: > Steve Carroll wrote: > > >Sure... but that's totally irrelevant to the point my question above > >(as still seen in *this* post) is raising > > Yeah, that's a badass "point", "Steve". LOL! Of your childlike mind, I asked the question (hey, Feeb, this one really is more of a "rhetorical" one!): "Does it make more sense to confine "restricting immigration" to a controlled manner (legally) or to just leave it up to a haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... " In an isolated response to that paragraph, found here... <72e5d7fd-8552-477c-a512-f7c190571ff6@googlegroups.com> ... one of the irrelevant things to it hh responded with read: "Second, the penalties for employers are known to be inadequate and weak, so raising the fines on businesses is an option too." And now you come along and quote (someone?): > "We would be better off, if everyone would follow the rules." > Jeezuz. It's like arguing with a child. It's actually hilarious that you two are pretending you're even following along ;) But if you can, try to grasp his last response: "Except that there is data, which is often good enough to debunk some of the current advocacy for certain policies." He believes the "data" is "good enough" to undermine the idea that a"crisis" is taking place... notably, the term is a sticking point for people labeling themselves as "liberals", and it's obvious why. "Case in point: it is already known that illegal immigration arrests are down by over 80% from their historical peaks without building an improved wall." I'll say it again, a fence *is* a wall for the purpose of keeping people out and one of the reasons the misleading number of the cited 80% even exists is due, in part, to the fact that we *have* "improved" walls since the aforementioned "historical peaks". We also spend a lot of money fixing them. "To what degree does just this one data point show the claims of a border “crisis” as being patently untrue?" My take: hh seeks to calm all fears by 'numbers-guy-splaining', via normalization, something that shouldn't be normalized IMO. Is 50+K people/month a "crisis" if you've no means to house or adjudicate that number (as soon as they set foot on U.S. soil it becomes a taxpayer issue)? Should we spend our time arguing over a term so as to pretend no solution is required, or for a solution? We all know a digital wall would be the most effective for this part of the issue, so why haven't Dems, who have consistently sold themselves as 'standing up for the common man' (but which man?) better pursued this avenue? We know why the Republicans won't, they're all rotten, racist and mysogynistic bastards who eat their young... but what about the group who allegedly champions 'the little guy', who has held houses of Congress more often than not in the last half decade or so? Are people like Kirsanow and Morgan full of crap in your mind or are they making *any* valid points? "Similarly, the primary modes and rankings of smuggling of illegal drugs into the US is known ... and 95% of it isn’t by driving around a wall, or over/under a wall, etc." You see no problems with that number?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-10 08:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g9p7nnF2838U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #483703 |
On 1/10/19 8:26 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 7:07:16 AM UTC-7, chrisv wrote: >> Steve Carroll wrote: >> >>> Sure... but that's totally irrelevant to the point my question above >>> (as still seen in *this* post) is raising >> >> Yeah, that's a badass "point", "Steve". > > LOL! > > Of your childlike mind, You repeatedly push childlike either/or situations then accuse others of being childlike in their thinking. Do you see the irony? > I asked the question > (hey, Feeb, this one really is more of a "rhetorical" one!): > > "Does it make more sense to confine "restricting immigration" > to a controlled manner (legally) or to just leave it up to a > haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... " False dichotomy. Nobody is saying they back illegal immigration, though many of us understand how a broken immigration system encourages a black market immigration system. It is like looking at a 100% sales tax. If we had that it would be understandable why people avoid it. It would even be defensible. It would be a broken system that would need a fix. The solution would NOT be to go after those who avoid the tax illegally, it would be to fix the tax. > In an isolated response to that paragraph, found here... > > <72e5d7fd-8552-477c-a512-f7c190571ff6@googlegroups.com> > > ... one of the irrelevant things to it hh responded with read: > > "Second, the penalties for employers are known to be inadequate > and weak, so raising the fines on businesses is an option too." You do not see the relevance on illegal immigration with jobs for those who illegally immigrate. A child could see how those are connected! You mock others for their childlike mind, but here you show you are not even up to that level! > And now you come along and quote (someone?): > >> "We would be better off, if everyone would follow the rules." >> Jeezuz. It's like arguing with a child. > > It's actually hilarious that you two are pretending you're even > following along ;) But if you can, try to grasp his last response: We should have rules that make sense. > "Except that there is data, which is often good enough to debunk some of > the current advocacy for certain policies." > > He believes the "data" is "good enough" to undermine the idea > that a"crisis" is taking place... notably, the term is a sticking point > for people labeling themselves as "liberals", and it's obvious why. Yes, Carroll, data and evidence and knowledge are important in knowing if a "crisis" is taking place, even if you just want to go by emotion and not really knowing. > "Case in point: it is already known that illegal immigration arrests are down > by over 80% from their historical peaks without building an improved wall." > > I'll say it again, a fence *is* a wall for the purpose of keeping > people out and one of the reasons the misleading number of the > cited 80% even exists is due, in part, to the fact that we *have* > "improved" walls since the aforementioned "historical peaks". > We also spend a lot of money fixing them. And nobody is against such physical borders. Nobody. Even Trump, at the start, spoke of not needing a full wall -- he spoke of the natural barriers. Now he says we cannot have security without a man-made wall. > "To what degree does just this one data point show the claims of a border > “crisis” as being patently untrue?" > > My take: hh seeks to calm all fears by 'numbers-guy-splaining', > via normalization, something that shouldn't be normalized IMO. Yeah, he wants to actually understand if there is a crisis (one not even Trump can describe consistently and for which he uses numbers his own administration does not back). You think understanding is a BAD thing. Want to go back to talking about child like minds? LOL! You are saying we should use emotion over evidence to support a wall you have said you do not really care about one way or the other. > Is 50+K people/month a "crisis" if you've no means to house > or adjudicate that number (as soon as they set foot on U.S. > soil it becomes a taxpayer issue)? Cite these figures, please. > Should we spend our time > arguing over a term so as to pretend no solution is required, > or for a solution? We all know a digital wall would be the most > effective for this part of the issue, so why haven't Dems, who > have consistently sold themselves as 'standing up for the > common man' (but which man?) better pursued this avenue? Democrats are backing many solutions to deal with the border security, including high tech solutions. You simply are doing as you do and pushing partisan crap. > We know why the Republicans won't, they're all rotten, racist > and mysogynistic bastards who eat their young. Cite. > .. but what > about the group who allegedly champions 'the little guy', who > has held houses of Congress more often than not in the last > half decade or so? Are people like Kirsanow and Morgan > full of crap in your mind or are they making *any* valid points? > > "Similarly, the primary modes and rankings of smuggling of illegal drugs into > the US is known ... and 95% of it isn’t by driving around a wall, or over/under > a wall, etc." > > You see no problems with that number? A wall would not solve the drug problem. Even without a huge symbolic wall, most drugs do not come across that way. And even if we did have a wall, drug runners can buy ladders or drones. Cheap solutions to bypass a very expensive symbol. -- 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 | 2019-01-10 07:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a57024a0-d1a4-42a2-a30c-cf289a14db30@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483703 |
On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 8:26:17 AM UTC-7, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 7:07:16 AM UTC-7, chrisv wrote: > > Steve Carroll wrote: > > > > >Sure... but that's totally irrelevant to the point my question above > > >(as still seen in *this* post) is raising > > > > Yeah, that's a badass "point", "Steve". > > LOL! > > Of your childlike mind, I asked the question > (hey, Feeb, this one really is more of a "rhetorical" one!): > > "Does it make more sense to confine "restricting immigration" > to a controlled manner (legally) or to just leave it up to a > haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... " > > In an isolated response to that paragraph, found here... > > <72e5d7fd-8552-477c-a512-f7c190571ff6@googlegroups.com> > > ... one of the irrelevant things to it hh responded with read: > > "Second, the penalties for employers are known to be inadequate > and weak, so raising the fines on businesses is an option too." > > And now you come along and quote (someone?): > > > "We would be better off, if everyone would follow the rules." > > Jeezuz. It's like arguing with a child. > > It's actually hilarious that you two are pretending you're even > following along ;) But if you can, try to grasp his last response: > > "Except that there is data, which is often good enough to debunk some of > the current advocacy for certain policies." > > He believes the "data" is "good enough" to undermine the idea > that a"crisis" is taking place... notably, the term is a sticking point > for people labeling themselves as "liberals", and it's obvious why. > > "Case in point: it is already known that illegal immigration arrests are down > by over 80% from their historical peaks without building an improved wall." > > I'll say it again, a fence *is* a wall for the purpose of keeping > people out and one of the reasons the misleading number of the > cited 80% even exists is due, in part, to the fact that we *have* > "improved" walls since the aforementioned "historical peaks". > We also spend a lot of money fixing them. > > "To what degree does just this one data point show the claims of a border > “crisis” as being patently untrue?" > > My take: hh seeks to calm all fears by 'numbers-guy-splaining', > via normalization, something that shouldn't be normalized IMO. > > Is 50+K people/month a "crisis" if you've no means to house > or adjudicate that number (as soon as they set foot on U.S. > soil it becomes a taxpayer issue)? Should we spend our time > arguing over a term so as to pretend no solution is required, > or for a solution? We all know a digital wall would be the most > effective for this part of the issue, so why haven't Dems, who > have consistently sold themselves as 'standing up for the > common man' (but which man?) better pursued this avenue? > We know why the Republicans won't, they're all rotten, racist > and mysogynistic bastards who eat their young... but what > about the group who allegedly champions 'the little guy', who > has held houses of Congress more often than not in the last > half decade or so? Are people like Kirsanow and Morgan > full of crap in your mind or are they making *any* valid points? > > "Similarly, the primary modes and rankings of smuggling of illegal drugs into > the US is known ... and 95% of it isn’t by driving around a wall, or over/under > a wall, etc." > > You see no problems with that number? It was Steve 'The Fool' Carroll who was publicly asking how better to mask his forgeries. I bet he thinks his life was perfect. The "advocates" value the lowest common denominator instead of choice. -- One Smart Penny http://www.5z8.info/php-start_GPS_tracking-user_j3m3lg_whitepower http://alt.conspiracy.narkive.com/QcWYJ4Px/the-mentally-ill-mark-s-bilk Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-11 12:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <220893b7-5ae1-4368-9b85-0f5863e2fb8b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483703 |
Steve Carroll wrote:
> chrisv wrote:
> > Steve Carroll wrote:
> >
> > >Sure... but that's totally irrelevant to the point my question above
> > >(as still seen in *this* post) is raising
> >
> > Yeah, that's a badass "point", "Steve".
>
> LOL!
>
> Of your childlike mind, I asked the question
> (hey, Feeb, this one really is more of a "rhetorical" one!):
>
> "Does it make more sense to confine "restricting immigration"
> to a controlled manner (legally) or to just leave it up to a
> haphazard amount of leakage (illegal)... "
>
> In an isolated response to that paragraph, found here...
>
> <72e5d7fd-8552-477c-a512-f7c190571ff6@googlegroups.com>
>
> ... one of the irrelevant things to it hh responded with read:
>
> "Second, the penalties for employers are known to be inadequate
> and weak, so raising the fines on businesses is an option too."
>
> And now you come along and quote (someone?):
>
> > "We would be better off, if everyone would follow the rules."
> > Jeezuz. It's like arguing with a child.
>
> It's actually hilarious that you two are pretending you're even
> following along ;) But if you can, try to grasp his last response:
>
> "Except that there is data, which is often good enough to debunk some of
> the current advocacy for certain policies."
>
> He believes the "data" is "good enough" to undermine the idea
> that a"crisis" is taking place... notably, the term is a sticking point
> for people labeling themselves as "liberals", and it's obvious why.
No, because when the POTUS is saying that he's about to formally
declare a National Emergency, it isn't just mere "liberal labeling."
What's absent is any proof that the Status Quo materially changed
to materially more dire. The data shows that illegal immigration
has not only been chronically present for the past 40 years, but
during that period at rates up to 5x higher than current.
> > "Case in point: it is already known that illegal immigration
> > arrests are down by over 80% from their historical peaks
> > without building an improved wall."
>
> I'll say it again, a fence *is* a wall for the purpose of keeping
> people out and one of the reasons the misleading number of the
> cited 80% even exists is due, in part, to the fact that we *have*
> "improved" walls since the aforementioned "historical peaks".
In 2017, a GAO audit criticized CBP, stating that "CBP cannot measure
the contribution of fencing to border security operations along the
southwest border because it has not developed metrics for this
assessment." As such, how much more money do you want to pour
into a pet project that hasn't been able to quantify its worth?
Particularly since the rates have fallen by over 50% since the
last mile of fence was built.
> We also spend a lot of money fixing them.
Which is merely an admission that the "$5.7B" is a deliberate lowball?
> Is 50+K people/month a "crisis" if you've no means to house
> or adjudicate that number (as soon as they set foot on U.S.
> soil it becomes a taxpayer issue)?
Deliberately constraining one's own resources is a self-inflicted
wound. Maybe the Republicans shouldn't have deliberately created
that huge backlog of bench appointments under Obama, right?
> Should we spend our time arguing over a term so as to pretend
> no solution is required, or for a solution?
Neither: those who are claiming that this is (a) a problem
which (b) is urgent, and (c) requires immediate funding; should
support their allegation with relevant documentation & facts.
> "Similarly, the primary modes and rankings of smuggling of
> illegal drugs into the US is known ... and 95% of it isn’t
> by driving around a wall, or over/under a wall, etc."
>
> You see no problems with that number?
Not the point, which was made quite clear:
"When you focus on only 5% of the problem’s modality, how
are you going to slow it by more than 5%?"
-hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-11 14:51 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <u70i3ettj387enhe0o7793m02iiitvvuce@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #483958 |
-hh wrote: >Which is merely an admission that the "$5.7B" is a deliberate lowball? I believe the $5.7B is only to construct the first portion, about 1/4 of the total construction cost. Maintenance is extra. -- 'Only in COLA can someone recommend giving 250 Linux distros to a guy who doesn't know how to turn a PC on in order that he might "evaluate" the solution best meeting his (unknown) needs.' - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-11 13:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <37d1a5ba-8e08-4a65-bcea-68d9de9fec84@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #483960 |
On Friday, January 11, 2019 at 1:51:26 PM UTC-7, chrisv wrote: > -hh wrote: > > >Which is merely an admission that the "$5.7B" is a deliberate lowball? > > I believe the $5.7B is only to construct the first portion, about 1/4 > of the total construction cost. > > Maintenance is extra. > > -- > 'Only in COLA can someone recommend giving 250 Linux distros to a guy > who doesn't know how to turn a PC on in order that he might "evaluate" > the solution best meeting his (unknown) needs.' - "True Linux > advocate" Hadron Quark These losers get their enjoyment out of eliciting replies to their flooding, which is the very definition of a troll. Like most everyone else in the US, Jonas Eklundh Communication relies on the MSM to form his convictions on the news. That being the case, he only is familiar with and consents to the accepted claims which also happens to be the ones which characterize education in a dishonestly positive and righteous slant. I bet Jonas Eklundh Communication does not even know what is wrong with Breitbart. Most regulars in this group do application development either as a leisure activity or as a job, so I am skeptical anybody here consider writing macros to be "impossible". Jonas Eklundh Communication suffers from paranoid delusions so, to him, everything, even responses to his idiocy, are "abuses". Who *doesn't* know this? Just look at your attempts and look at mine, there is nothing for me to learn from a fool like Jonas Eklundh Communication. But whatever, let him keep making an idiot of himself. He can make another sock to pat himself on the back. I will not ask Jonas Eklundh Communication how any part of Rudy Canoza's body tastes no matter how frequently Jonas Eklundh Communication smooches it. Can you get Rudy Canoza to agree? -- What Every Entrepreneur Must Know! http://prescottcomputerguy.com/screenflow http://tinyurl.com/gsleb4p Jonas Eklundh Communication AB
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 26 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 26 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web