Sunday, December 12, 2010

Re: ACTION Alert: Call and Fax your two US Senators on DADT Repeal NOW!

Tommy,
DADT was made by executive order and can only be killed by executive
order or the courts. It has been killed, Obama is fighting it.... Why
would he do that ?? Only one reason I can think of... Muslim grade
school, Muslim dads (both), bows to muslim leaders, Recites the Koran,
doesa not wear US Flag lapel, does not salute the US flag, was a
member of Reverend Wrights "christian" church where he admits half the
members are indeed moslim....

Add all the above FACTS to the way Muslims feel about Gays and tell me
why he would SUE to keep DADT active when all it takes to end it is
HIS signature... NO VOTE NEEDED.

On Dec 11, 11:36 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well I disagree with part of that.
>
> President Obama wants DADT and DOMA repealed, but he wants the
> legislature to do it. He has said "Send me a bill".
>
> The Department Of Justice is obliged to uphold existing laws, even
> those the Administration disagrees with.
>
> On 12/11/10, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Thats neither my job nor perogative.
>
> > We OBVIOUSLY disagree ideologically/philisophically/any ogically.
>
> > THATS the reason I come here.  If i want people to agree with me, I go
> > to FreeReblica, and I don't
>
> > We have had sprirted debates for sure, but I don't we've ended up in
> > blind insults
>
> > (If I have, I'm sorry - If you have so should be you)
>
> > Here it is, ok?
>
> > Congress has proven INCREDIBLY inept at getting rid of DADT.  Blame
> > GOP or Dems, I don't care!  The judicial branch HAS killed it, and if
> > not for a DOJ challenge, it would be 3 months dead - end of story,
> > Fuck congress, lets move on.
>
> > Its a kiss.  A gift.  STOP!  Politics is over.  The Judicial Branch
> > ruled it UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
>
> > It don't get more binding than that.  WTF happens if Obama takes this
> > to SCOTUS, and the CONSERVATIVES uphold Virginia Philips' ruling.
>
> > We're talking more egg on faces than Omelettes for America, (Europe,
> > Asia, Africa...)
>
> > Why challenge a case you believe is RIGHT???
>
> > As PROVEN, no, there is NO obligation to do so.  Judicial checks are
> > equal to the other 2.
>
> > Oh, and I thing DOMA is WORSE!
>
> > And yet here is Obama fighting for THAT too!
>
> > Point:  Gay rights being left v right is BULLSHIT!  Look at the LEFT!
>
> > God bless, mate, and keep up the banter.
>
> > On Dec 11, 10:45 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Thank you Greg.
> >> You are more Progressive than I had realized.
> >> Perhaps you can teach Keith and others a thing or two.
>
> >> On 12/11/10, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Get ready Tommy. . .
>
> >> > I couldn't agree more!
>
> >> > Please realize that I am adamently against both DADT and DOMA.
>
> >> > I am simply saying that neither POTUS, nor anyone else needs congress
> >> > to end DADT (and the ban).  The judicial branch has already done it.
>
> >> > 3 equal branches.  This is the judicial check.  Roll with it!
>
> >> > Probably the musician in me (and there's a lot of that in me)
>
> >> > On Dec 11, 10:27 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Tiny Keithie Keith Keithie-
>
> >> >> You have a dirty, offensive mind.
> >> >> You are Wrong again, again, and yet again.
>
> >> >> I do not have hate, lies and smear as you falsely and slanderously
> >> >> state and insult me over and over and over again.
>
> >> >> This explanation put forth demonstrates your misguided misconceptions
> >> >> and your blatant homophobia even further. Your thinking is not at all
> >> >> cognitive, it is deeply prejudiced.
>
> >> >> Most gays do not put their sexuality at the forefront of their lives.
> >> >> In fact, most choose to hide and surpress their sexuality, and their
> >> >> very essense, due to homophobia, opression, and persecution. While
> >> >> heterosexuals go around talking about their romantic encounters,
> >> >> relationsips, and crushes etc, ad nauseum.
>
> >> >> Many gays are chaste and even celebate, and most certainly do NOT
> >> >> flaunt their sexuality or dress in a flamboyant manner. Many look more
> >> >> ordinary and conservative than most heterosexuals. There are a few,
> >> >> but there are many heterosexuals who have flamboyant deress and
> >> >> behavior, and unusual sexualities and kinkly fetishes. Pinning those
> >> >> behaviors soley on a few gays is unfair and false.
>
> >> >> Your mischaracterizations, stereotyping, typecasting, and mind in the
> >> >> gutter  demonstrates your deep prejudice and homophobia.
> >> >> You, Keith, are a judgemental prejudiced homophobic bigot.
>
> >> >> Yes, you are.
>
> >> >> On 12/10/10, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > Lil' TommyTomTom,
>
> >> >> > This is where your hate, lies and smear get in the way of your
> >> >> > cognitive
> >> >> > thinking.
>
> >> >> > Because I am opposed to those individuals who put what they do in the
> >> >> > bedroom at the forefront of their lives;  in other words,  because I
> >> >> > am
> >> >> > opposed to those individuals that define their very existence by
> >> >> > their
> >> >> > sexuality,  this does not make me a "Homophobe".
>
> >> >> > What you do behind closed doors might be wonderful.  I don't know.  I
> >> >> > will
> >> >> > never know.   I don't care what it is that you do sexually.
>
> >> >> > I am opposed to those militants who are attempting to force their
> >> >> > sexuality
> >> >> > upon me, and the rest of America.   I am opposed to parades in front
> >> >> > of
> >> >> > children with you donned in assless chaps, boas, and/or dressed as
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > Statute of Liberty.   I am opposed to you, and any other group or
> >> >> > entity
> >> >> > demanding more rights than what the rest of Americans enjoy, because
> >> >> > of
> >> >> > who
> >> >> > you sleep with.
>
> >> >> > You are correct, that there have been Gays in our United States
> >> >> > military
> >> >> > since 1776.   None of them chose to get out and parade around,
> >> >> >  announcing
> >> >> > who it is that they are boffing or honking on.   This is how it
> >> >> > should
> >> >> > be.
>
> >> >> > KeithInDC
>
> >> >> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com>
> >> >> > wrote:
>
> >> >> >> Wrong again Keith.
>
> >> >> >> Your homophobia is showing.
>
> >> >> >> Gays have been serving in the military, well,  since before
> >> >> >> Alexander
> >> >> >> The Great and his lover Hephaesteon.
>
> >> >> >> The existing military code of conduct shoold be adequate for any
> >> >> >> behavior issues from a very few.
>
> >> >> >> By your logic, heterosexuals should be banned from the military as
> >> >> >> well due to criminals like Dubya, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, variuus
> >> >> >> felons, etc.
>
> >> >> >> Please also note that Military Enlistment of Felons Doubled under
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> Bush Administration.
>
> >> >> >>http://www.palmcenter.org/press/dadt/releases/military_enlistment_of_...
>
> >> >> >> Top Ten American War
> >> >> >> Criminals Living
> >> >> >> Freely Today
>
> >> >> >> Rense Exclusive
> >> >> >> By Douglas Herman
> >> >> >> 12-14-5
>
> >> >> >> A war crime is a punishable offense, under international law, for
> >> >> >> violations of the law of war by any person or persons, military or
> >> >> >> civilian. Every violation of the law of war is a war crime. Also,
> >> >> >> war
> >> >> >> crimes are those committed during wartime in violation of
> >> >> >> international conventions intended to protect civilian populations
> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> prisoners of war. You will note that many on this list, categorized
> >> >> >> as
> >> >> >> war criminals, ironically, are among the most powerful and wealthy
> >> >> >> US
> >> >> >> citizens
>
> >> >> >> Robert McNamara. Former US Secretary of Defense, helped kill
> >> >> >> approximately 2-3 million, mostly poor Vietnamese, Cambodians and
> >> >> >> Laotians. Not to mention a sizeable portion of the 58,000 dead US
> >> >> >> servicemen pressed into that war. Not to mention that equal number
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> US veterans who committed suicide in the years to follow. McNamara
> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> an Elder Statesman now, walking around freely today.
>
> >> >> >> Henry Kissinger. Former US Secretary of State, had a hand in the
> >> >> >> killings mentioned above. Plus condoned thousands of additional
> >> >> >> killings in Chile, under the sponsorship of US foreign policy.  Won
> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. Elder Statesman, walking around
> >> >> >> freely today.
>
> >> >> >> George HW Bush.  Former super spy, former US President, the first to
> >> >> >> graduate from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) into the
> >> >> >> presidency and bring lessons learned at CIA headquarters directly
> >> >> >> into
> >> >> >> US policy. While serving under Ronald Reagan, helped encourage the
> >> >> >> Iraq-Iran war, resulting in deaths of one million people, allowing
> >> >> >> US
> >> >> >> oil and arms dealers to profit greatly.  During the 'Eighties,
> >> >> >> helped
> >> >> >> encourage US sponsored military dictators in Latin America, guilty
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> extermination of thousands of ordinary citizens, via US-trained
> >> >> >> "death
> >> >> >> squads."  Conducted pre-emptive war with Panama, resulting in
> >> >> >> 1,000-4,000 deaths, simply to topple former CIA henchman and drug
> >> >> >> lord, Manuel Noriega. Elder Statesman, walking around freely today,
> >> >> >> basking in limelight.
>
> >> >> >> George W. Bush. Two term US president, elected using electronic,
> >> >> >> "black box" voting methods that permit no verification of actual
> >> >> >> vote
> >> >> >> count. Conducted two pre-emptive wars, resulting in excess of
> >> >> >> 100,000
> >> >> >> US. Iraqi and Afghani deaths.  Condones the use of torture as US
> >> >> >> policy. Condones rejection of the Geneva Convention, becoming the
> >> >> >> first US president to openly do so. Considers the US Constitution "A
> >> >> >> Goddamned piece of paper." Embattled Statesman, walking around
> >> >> >> freely
> >> >> >> today.
>
> >> >> >> Dick Cheney. Former US Secretary of Defense, and signator of the
> >> >> >> PNAC,
> >> >> >> and current Vice President. Accused mastermind of the 911
> >> >> >> "terrorist"
> >> >> >> attack against the US (unproven), Cheney has been called "The Vice
> >> >> >> President For Torture" by the Washington Post. A staunch supporter
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> the Middle Eastern War Without End, Cheney, like Wolfowitz and
> >> >> >> Rumsfeld bears particular responsibility for the conduct of the war.
> >> >> >> Elder Statesman, walking around freely today.
>
> >> >> >> 8. Paul Wolfowitz. Former US Deputy Secretary of Defense and
> >> >> >> architect
> >> >> >> of the Middle Eastern War Without End. Casualties in two pre-emptive
> >> >> >> wars now exceed 100,000 deaths, not including the estimated 2,000+
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Manning Up

Actually Bruce it is exactly like renting an apartment and then
filling it with tons of friends so the landlord can't get in. As long
as my rent is paid I have the right to use the space allotted to me.
If the landlord has not established an "Occupancy" limit and has no
way to enact one.... I can put as many people there as I want. If he
has no controls to cover the "Common areas" I can fill those to and
thus legally deny service to other tenants and or the landlord himself
as long as no physical damage is being done.

On Dec 11, 7:08 am, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://wikiliberty.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Joe E
> To: libertarian-...@meetup.com
>
> I wanted to take a minute to respond to Eric's analogy trying to justify
> "denial of service" computer attacks, suggesting that such behavior does not
> represent a crime.
> ...
>
> Eric's analogy, suggesting that a computer "denial of service" attack is the
> equivalent of people, in large numbers, going to a business owner's premises
> and loitering, thus preventing that business owner from conducting business,
> fails to properly represent the action of computer "denial of service" (DoS)
> attacks.
>
> In DoS, the attackers are using a tool, the computer -- which is designed to
> do repetitive "actions" effortlessly -- to block (using electrons) a
> business owner and those the owner invites onto his servers, from accessing
> his rightful property (the servers). Eric's analogy would be a more accurate
> representation if he suggested people sent large numbers of robots to crowd
> in a business's doorway and prevent the business owner, and anyone else,
> from accessing the business.
>
> The other issue Eric is misrepresenting is the nature of private property
> when a business opens that property inviting the public to come and engage
> in business transactions with him. His "open for business" sign is NOT
> saying he is giving up all control and people can come and loiter and
> interrupt his business operation. He can tell people to "get out" of his
> store; if they refuse, he can have them arrested for trespassing.
>
> In a DoS attack, the attackers are ignoring the rules of the private
> property they program their computers to attack. The business (server)
> owner, when opening his computers to access from the public is NOT giving
> anyone "unlimited freedom" to access that space; that space -- on PRIVATE
> property -- is open for those seeking to engage in potential transactions
> with the business owner.
>
> These points are important; trespassing (which is what a DoS attack
> represents) does not need to involve "damage" to be the crime it is (even
> though it does normally involve the damage of interrupting business
> operations). It is an action which ignores the rights of private property
> owners. Just because someone uses a tool (the computer) to reach out and
> trespass (and interrupt people as they seek to engage in business
> transactions with others) does not change the nature of their action.
>
> The computer and internet is a tool like a "long stick"; a person using it
> needs to be mindful of the rights of others in that space -- on the
> communication lines and onto the servers owned by others -- when he "pokes"
> onto their property.
>
> --
> Please Note: If you hit "*REPLY*", your message will be sent to
> *everyone*on this mailing list (
> libertarian-...@meetup.com)
> This message was sent by Joe Egan (joeega...@gmail.com) from Low Country
> Libertarians <http://www.meetup.com/libertarian-352/>.
> To learn more about Joe Egan, visit his/her member
> profile<http://www.meetup.com/libertarian-352/members/11364048/>
> To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click
> here<http://www.meetup.com/libertarian-352/settings/>
>
>  Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 |
> supp...@meetup.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: FW: BREAKING NEWS: Bernie Madoff's Son Found Dead

Travis,

What color was it ?? My dryer is always eating the black socks...so if
the one missing is black maybe you could send me the one you have
left ??

On Dec 11, 9:01 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I lost a sock once.  No big deal.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Cold Water <coldwater...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Subject: BREAKING NEWS: Bernie Madoff's Son Found Dead
>
> > Mark Madoff, son of imprisoned financier Bernie Madoff, has been found dead
> > inside his New York City apartment in apparent suicide, official says
>
> > More headlines from FoxNews.com:
> >http://email.foxnews.com/t?ctl=8E2A:8F3B1D9BACD4171CA1BF482ADFE2CCF3&
>
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Grand Obstructionist Repblicans Block DADT Repeal, Vote No to helping 9/11 Responders, and No to Funding the Troops in a Time of War.

Tommy, Tommy, Tommy,

DADT was killed two months ago. Obama filed in Federal court to keep it alive. If Obama were to simply withdraw his suit DADT would not exist.

Talk to your hero.....

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:
Best chance for DADT repeal failed due to the Grand Old Republican
Obstructionists, led by John McCain and John Boehner.

On 12/10/10, GregfromBoston <greg.vincent@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Best chance failed then, but of course, you just don't knno that.
>
> Drop the court challenge and best chance is 100%.
>
> If republicans block it stand alone, I will join you in your
> opposition.  Until then, you're still guessing.
>
> Note well that you aren't claiming dems just voted against UI
> extension.  Its piggy backed too.  Get it?
>
> On Dec 10, 10:20 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The amaendment was the best chance of getting this bill past the
>> Republican Obstructionists.
>> A Stand alone bill will face even stronger opposition fron John McCain
>> and his homophobic Republican cronies.
>>
>> DUH!
>>
>> On 12/10/10, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Still working on this Tom?  Its the same piggy back bill.  This is why
>> > Snowe and Lieberman will submit a stand alone bill.  Duh!
>>
>> > Using your logic, House dems just voted against extending unemployment
>> > insurance.  Funny you're not mentioning that.
>>
>> > --
>> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>
>> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>
>> --
>> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
>> Have a great day,
>> Tommy
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.


--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.



--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

**JP** If london was under Israeli occupation