Gary, add bottled water to that list. LOL.

N.

Nancy2 wrote:
>
> Gary, add bottled water to that list. LOL.


hahaha No kidding, Nancy2. IMO, the bottled water thing is the
biggest (successful) scam ever pulled off in the history of mankind.

I've seen co-workers go into a convenience store and pay $1.69 for a
pint of bottled water. And they do this every day. Are you kidding
me??? LMAO!

On 9/25/2015 5:46 AM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "Bruce" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 11:10:10 +0100, "Ophelia" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Bruce" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 10:15:22 +0100, "Ophelia" >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bruce" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 06:12:57 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sf, your statement has an implied judgment, which I don't
>>>>>>> appreciate.
>>>>>>> Did
>>>>>>> you not see the part where I said I use email?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I repeat, nobody "needs" FB.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We also don't "need" RFC, yet here we are.
>>>>>
>>>>> OH I don't know. Where would some folk go to get their jollies?
>>>>> Half the
>>>>> things they do here would get them a severe beating in real life. .
>>>>> It is
>>>>> very easy to be brave here. That is why I laugh when I see the
>>>>> tough guys
>>>>> strutting their stuff)
>>>>
>>>> Maybe they would start buying gossip magazines and emailing each other
>>>> about the scandalous stuff they've read.
>>>
>>> Hmm don't think so. They wouldn't be able to see the hurt and upset
>>> they
>>> (hope to) inflict, now would they?
>>
>> You're right in that the sadistic factor would be lacking.
>
> ... along with their enjoyment.
>

Subhuman bullying stalkers all.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 10:35:57 -0400, pltrgyst > wrote:

> On 9/21/15 5:46 PM, Nancy2 wrote:
> > Larry, I don't need FB to keep in touch...I use a couple old-style "round robin" letters,
> > email, and the telephone (a landline). Nobody "needs" FB.
>
> It's a tool. Like any other tool, you need to evaluate its utility and
> shortcomings. To just dismiss all social media out-of-hand is your loss.
>
Tru dat.

--

sf

On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 15:09:57 -0700 (PDT), rosie >
wrote:

> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
> > On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
> >
> > > Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
> > > postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
> >
> > I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
> > there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
> > have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.
>
> I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good, people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the right thing in there.

Certain members are not doing it because that's how they are
naturally, they toe the line because the axe will fall when they slip
into their typical usenet behavior... and that's a good thing.

--

sf

On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:42:22 +1000, Xeno >
wrote:

> On 24/09/2015 8:09 AM, rosie wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
> >> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
> >>
> >>> Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
> >>> postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
> >>
> >> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
> >> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
> >> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.
> >
> > I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good, people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the right thing in there.
> >
> That's because they cannot hide behind a pseudonym.

Not true.

--

sf

On 9/25/2015 9:49 AM, sf wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 15:09:57 -0700 (PDT), rosie >
> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
>>> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
>>>
>>>> Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
>>>> postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
>>>
>>> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
>>> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
>>> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.
>>
>> I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good, people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the right thing in there.
>
> Certain members are not doing it because that's how they are
> naturally, they toe the line because the axe will fall when they slip
> into their typical usenet behavior... and that's a good thing.
>

I can not BELIEVE you folks let Sqwerty hang there!

Talk about a disincentive to visit.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:17:29 -0400, Gary > wrote:

wrote:
>>
>> We weren't so sure - his arrest happened just prior to GWB visiting
>> Halifax - it seemed too much of a co-incidence. I was going to go
>> downtown and protest his visit too but it was bitterly cold and
>> protesters were going to be penned up out of his sight, so I decided
>> age let me off that one!
>
>Just curious... Why were you planning to protest a visit from GWB?

Why??

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:16:22 -0300, wrote:

>On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 08:50:25 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:17:29 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We weren't so sure - his arrest happened just prior to GWB visiting
>>>> Halifax - it seemed too much of a co-incidence. I was going to go
>>>> downtown and protest his visit too but it was bitterly cold and
>>>> protesters were going to be penned up out of his sight, so I decided
>>>> age let me off that one!
>>>
>>>Just curious... Why were you planning to protest a visit from GWB?
>>
>>Why??
>
>Merely because I have always stood up for what I believed in - not
>just a lip service person like another one around here!!

Oh I know. My "why??" was directed at Gary for having to ask you why
I would have thought the reasons blatantly self-evident why one
would protest anyone from that particular family.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:56:07 -0300, wrote:

>On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 09:47:23 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:16:22 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 08:50:25 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:17:29 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>>>
wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We weren't so sure - his arrest happened just prior to GWB visiting
>>>>>> Halifax - it seemed too much of a co-incidence. I was going to go
>>>>>> downtown and protest his visit too but it was bitterly cold and
>>>>>> protesters were going to be penned up out of his sight, so I decided
>>>>>> age let me off that one!
>>>>>
>>>>>Just curious... Why were you planning to protest a visit from GWB?
>>>>
>>>>Why??
>>>
>>>Merely because I have always stood up for what I believed in - not
>>>just a lip service person like another one around here!!
>>
>>Oh I know. My "why??" was directed at Gary for having to ask you why
>> I would have thought the reasons blatantly self-evident why one
>>would protest anyone from that particular family.
>
>Well oddly enough, I didn't despise his father, he had the good sense
>to know when to quit in Iraq.

That was strangely out of character for him, I'll concede that. Makes
me wonder what the real reason was. Possibly they still had a use for
Saddam (whom Bush installed in Iraq to being with) and the regional
tensions in place at the time. IMO, he was far, far, far worse than
his son even had a hope of ever being. A truly evil sociopath. (You
won't see me describe anyone as evil very often either). But that's
all a whole other topic and by no means a small one, either.

> GWB though, confused by talk of WOMD
>and with oil people pushing him, made a grievous error and I put 9/10s
>of the blame for the current state of the mid-east at his door.

He was basically just a puppet you know. Without his family backing
him, he would have been little more than a petty crook.

On 9/25/2015 5:56 PM, wrote:
> Well oddly enough, I didn't despise his father, he had the good sense
> to know when to quit in Iraq.

You bloody stupid cow!

He knuckled to the Euros and let Soddem live to terrorize future
generations.

You're a moron's moron!

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 9/25/2015 6:12 PM, Je�us wrote:
>> Well oddly enough, I didn't despise his father, he had the good sense
>> >to know when to quit in Iraq.
> That was strangely out of character for him, I'll concede that. Makes
> me wonder what the real reason was. Possibly they still had a use for
> Saddam


They being our NATO/UN allies who forced him to withdraw from Iraq.

You stupid senile twit.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 26/09/2015 1:49 AM, sf wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:42:22 +1000, Xeno >
> wrote:
>
>> On 24/09/2015 8:09 AM, rosie wrote:
>>> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
>>>> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
>>>>
>>>>> Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
>>>>> postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
>>>>
>>>> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
>>>> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
>>>> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.
>>>
>>> I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good, people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the right thing in there.
>>>
>> That's because they cannot hide behind a pseudonym.
>
> Not true.
>
Post insults and see how long it is before you get 'kicked"... pseudonym
or real name.

--

Xeno

On 26/09/2015 5:26 AM, wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:49:34 -0700, sf > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 15:09:57 -0700 (PDT), rosie >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
>>>> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
>>>>
>>>>> Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
>>>>> postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
>>>>
>>>> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
>>>> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
>>>> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.
>>>
>>> I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good, people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the right thing in there.
>>
>> Certain members are not doing it because that's how they are
>> naturally, they toe the line because the axe will fall when they slip
>> into their typical usenet behavior... and that's a good thing.
>
> Must be difficult for you there and what do you do about your troll
> boyfriend?
>
LOL


--

Xeno

On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 06:12:57 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
> wrote:

> Sf, your statement has an implied judgment, which I don't appreciate. Did
> you not see the part where I said I use email?
>
> I repeat, nobody "needs" FB.
>
> N.

My threading has gone wacko, so I wish you'd included what I said.

--

sf

On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 10:38:41 -0400, Gary > wrote:

> Nancy2 wrote:
> >
> > Sf, your statement has an implied judgment, which I don't appreciate. Did
> > you not see the part where I said I use email?
> >
> > I repeat, nobody "needs" FB.
>
> I still wonder how *anyone* ever survived all the years before
> internet and cell phones.

How did they survive before the post office, pony express, carrier
pigeons and smoke signals?

--

sf

On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 12:44:32 +1000, Xeno >
wrote:

> On 26/09/2015 1:49 AM, sf wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:42:22 +1000, Xeno >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 24/09/2015 8:09 AM, rosie wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
> >>>> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
> >>>>> postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
> >>>> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
> >>>> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.
> >>>
> >>> I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good, people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the right thing in there.
> >>>
> >> That's because they cannot hide behind a pseudonym.
> >
> > Not true.
> >
> Post insults and see how long it is before you get 'kicked"... pseudonym
> or real name.

Agree. The sort of behavior that is tolerated here on rfc usenet will
make the poster history in rfc FB.

--

sf

On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 12:45:14 +1000, Xeno >
wrote:

> On 26/09/2015 5:26 AM, wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:49:34 -0700, sf > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 15:09:57 -0700 (PDT), rosie >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
> >>>> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
> >>>>> postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
> >>>> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
> >>>> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.
> >>>
> >>> I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good, people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the right thing in there.
> >>
> >> Certain members are not doing it because that's how they are
> >> naturally, they toe the line because the axe will fall when they slip
> >> into their typical usenet behavior... and that's a good thing.
> >
> > Must be difficult for you there and what do you do about your troll
> > boyfriend?
> >
> LOL

Why would I want to participate in rfc FB when it's fill with past and
present posters that I despise and there are plenty of other food
groups that I like better on FB?

PS: Don't think I missed the post where the one who can't even spell
her own pseudonym correctly said she lurked but didn't post to rfc on
FB. It remains obvious that she can't be civil for very long.

--

sf

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 06:12:57 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
> > wrote:
>
>> Sf, your statement has an implied judgment, which I don't appreciate.
>> Did
>> you not see the part where I said I use email?
>>
>> I repeat, nobody "needs" FB.
>>
>> N.
>
> My threading has gone wacko, so I wish you'd included what I said.

And what Nancy said is totally untrue. Some people, businesses and groups
only use Facebook now. The trend with restaurants here is to have a
Facebook page and not a website.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 10:38:41 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>> Nancy2 wrote:
>> >
>> > Sf, your statement has an implied judgment, which I don't appreciate.
>> > Did
>> > you not see the part where I said I use email?
>> >
>> > I repeat, nobody "needs" FB.
>>
>> I still wonder how *anyone* ever survived all the years before
>> internet and cell phones.
>
> How did they survive before the post office, pony express, carrier
> pigeons and smoke signals?

None of us here were alive back then.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 12:45:14 +1000, Xeno >
> wrote:
>
>> On 26/09/2015 5:26 AM, wrote:
>> > On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:49:34 -0700, sf > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 23 Sep 2015 15:09:57 -0700 (PDT), rosie >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
>> >>>> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with
>> >>>>> few
>> >>>>> postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt
>> >>>> that
>> >>>> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But
>> >>>> I
>> >>>> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking
>> >>>> included.
>> >>>
>> >>> I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good,
>> >>> people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There
>> >>> has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng
>> >>> nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the
>> >>> right thing in there.
>> >>
>> >> Certain members are not doing it because that's how they are
>> >> naturally, they toe the line because the axe will fall when they slip
>> >> into their typical usenet behavior... and that's a good thing.
>> >
>> > Must be difficult for you there and what do you do about your troll
>> > boyfriend?
>> >
>> LOL
>
> Why would I want to participate in rfc FB when it's fill with past and
> present posters that I despise and there are plenty of other food
> groups that I like better on FB?
>
> PS: Don't think I missed the post where the one who can't even spell
> her own pseudonym correctly said she lurked but didn't post to rfc on
> FB. It remains obvious that she can't be civil for very long.

Squee! I am pretty sure that I know who that is.

sf wrote:
>
> Xeno wrote:
> > Post insults and see how long it is before you get 'kicked"... pseudonym
> > or real name.
>
> Agree. The sort of behavior that is tolerated here on rfc usenet will
> make the poster history in rfc FB.

The Stepford Group

sf wrote:
>
> Gary wrote:
> > I still wonder how *anyone* ever survived all the years before
> > internet and cell phones.
>
> How did they survive before the post office, pony express, carrier
> pigeons and smoke signals?

They didn't survive. They're all dead.

wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 08:50:25 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:17:29 -0400, Gary > wrote:
> >
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> We weren't so sure - his arrest happened just prior to GWB visiting
> >>> Halifax - it seemed too much of a co-incidence. I was going to go
> >>> downtown and protest his visit too but it was bitterly cold and
> >>> protesters were going to be penned up out of his sight, so I decided
> >>> age let me off that one!
> >>
> >>Just curious... Why were you planning to protest a visit from GWB?
> >
> >Why??
>
> Merely because I have always stood up for what I believed in - not
> just a lip service person like another one around here!!

And you still didn't tell me why you were planning to attend a GWB
visit protest. What is your specific issue with him?

He was invited to your area. You protest a visit? How embarrassing is
that to your insignificant town?

No matter who is our president here, I will always honor the office
that he was elected to. Stupid other country people protesting an
invited visit from a world leader is ignorant and totally embarrassing
to me.

You need to stay home, cook lobsters and bake cookies.

Bruce wrote:
> It's not so self-evident if you voted for the man.

GWB was ok. No better or worse than any other president we've had.

Dem/liberals fought like crazy that the first election was fixed and
Al Gore should have won. Bullshit...that weirdo lost fair and square.
That doesn't explain why GWB won the re-election 4 years later.

Funny to me how it's the foreigners here in RFC that take so much
interest in USA politics. Maybe they should focus more on their own
counties elections.

On 9/26/2015 4:22 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>


>
> And what Nancy said is totally untrue. Some people, businesses and
> groups only use Facebook now. The trend with restaurants here is to
> have a Facebook page and not a website.

They'd lose my business, I'd never see them. Makes sense for them to be
there, but "in addition" not in place of, a regular web page.

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:56:07 -0300, wrote:

snip
>
>Well oddly enough, I didn't despise his father, he had the good sense
>to know when to quit in Iraq. GWB though, confused by talk of WOMD
>and with oil people pushing him, made a grievous error and I put 9/10s
>of the blame for the current state of the mid-east at his door.

absolutely.
Janet US

On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:12:39 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:

>On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:56:07 -0300, wrote:
>snip
>>
>>Well oddly enough, I didn't despise his father, he had the good sense
>>to know when to quit in Iraq.
>
>That was strangely out of character for him, I'll concede that. Makes
>me wonder what the real reason was. Possibly they still had a use for
>Saddam (whom Bush installed in Iraq to being with) and the regional
>tensions in place at the time. IMO, he was far, far, far worse than
>his son even had a hope of ever being. A truly evil sociopath. (You
>won't see me describe anyone as evil very often either). But that's
>all a whole other topic and by no means a small one, either.

He was a long-time diplomat and had an understanding of the ways of
power. He knew there was nothing to be gained by destabilizing the
whole area.
Janet US

I read my family's FB...i never post or say anything.

I disagree that I am missing something by dismissing "social media"
out of hand. What exactly am I missing? Being someone's follower
on Twitter? Using Instagram? Pinterest? Guess again, I miss
nothing that matters to me.

N.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:10:35 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Bruce wrote:
>> It's not so self-evident if you voted for the man.
>
>GWB was ok. No better or worse than any other president we've had.
>
>Dem/liberals fought like crazy that the first election was fixed and
>Al Gore should have won. Bullshit...that weirdo lost fair and square.
>That doesn't explain why GWB won the re-election 4 years later.
>
>Funny to me how it's the foreigners here in RFC that take so much
>interest in USA politics. Maybe they should focus more on their own
>counties elections.

they take interest because we can screw up the whole toy box.
Janet US

On 2015-09-26 10:52 AM, Janet B wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:56:07 -0300, wrote:
>
> snip
>>
>> Well oddly enough, I didn't despise his father, he had the good sense
>> to know when to quit in Iraq. GWB though, confused by talk of WOMD
>> and with oil people pushing him, made a grievous error and I put 9/10s
>> of the blame for the current state of the mid-east at his door.
>
> absolutely.

What offended me most was the with us or with the terrorists rhetoric
when he was looking for support to invade Iraq to disarm Saddam of that
vast arsenal of WMDs that we did not believe he had. Most of the
western countries knew that Saddam was a *******, but that he had his
hands full dealing with even worse *******s in his country. They
condemned him for using gas against internal enemies, but when he used
it against Iranian forces they provided satellite intelligence about
Iranian positions.

On 2015-09-26 10:56 AM, Janet B wrote:

>>
>> Funny to me how it's the foreigners here in RFC that take so much
>> interest in USA politics. Maybe they should focus more on their own
>> counties elections.
>
> they take interest because we can screw up the whole toy box.

You can indeed. The use is a economic and military powerhouse, and one
that, despite the spin, acts in its own interests and plays other power
against each other. Pierre Trudeau described the situation well, saying
"Living next to you is in some ways like sleeping with an elephant. No
matter how friendly and even-tempered is the beast, if I can call it
that, one is affected by every twitch and grunt."

On 2015-09-26 11:18 AM, wrote:

> I think too, it's partly that your system takes so long! That last
> year of a presidency is totally eclipsed by electioneering.
>
> We are not liking the fact that our election will run for eleven weeks
> this time, a record. It will be a relief when October 19 comes, and
> goes
>


We now have fixed date federal elections, so the election was going to
happen on that date. The only issue now is the date that Parliament was
dissolved and the election called. He could have waited until
September, but the date would have remained the same.

On 9/25/2015 11:51 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 22:49:54 -0700, sf > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 12:44:32 +1000, Xeno >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 26/09/2015 1:49 AM, sf wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:42:22 +1000, Xeno >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 24/09/2015 8:09 AM, rosie wrote:
>>>>>> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
>>>>>>>> postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
>>>>>>> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
>>>>>>> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good, people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the right thing in there.
>>>>>>
>>>>> That's because they cannot hide behind a pseudonym.
>>>>
>>>> Not true.
>>>>
>>> Post insults and see how long it is before you get 'kicked"... pseudonym
>>> or real name.
>>
>> Agree. The sort of behavior that is tolerated here on rfc usenet will
>> make the poster history in rfc FB.
>
> How would your troll friend go in Facebook?
>

You gutless little puke.

How the **** would YOU do in FB?

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 9/26/2015 1:08 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> Truth is, SHE is the one can't act civilized on RFC on Facebook.


**** YOUR LYING GODDAMNED WOMAN STALKING ASS STRAIGHT TO HELL, YOU FAT
CHEEKED VIRUS!@

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 9/26/2015 8:10 AM, Gary wrote:
> Bruce wrote:
>> It's not so self-evident if you voted for the man.
>
> GWB was ok. No better or worse than any other president we've had.
>
> Dem/liberals fought like crazy that the first election was fixed and
> Al Gore should have won. Bullshit...that weirdo lost fair and square.
> That doesn't explain why GWB won the re-election 4 years later.
>
> Funny to me how it's the foreigners here in RFC that take so much
> interest in USA politics. Maybe they should focus more on their own
> counties elections.
>

GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!

They pick at us to absolve themselves of the rampant misdeeds of their
own festering ********s, period.

It's called projection.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 9/26/2015 8:20 AM, wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:10:35 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>> Bruce wrote:
>>> It's not so self-evident if you voted for the man.
>>
>> GWB was ok. No better or worse than any other president we've had.
>>
>> Dem/liberals fought like crazy that the first election was fixed and
>> Al Gore should have won. Bullshit...that weirdo lost fair and square.
>> That doesn't explain why GWB won the re-election 4 years later.
>>
>> Funny to me how it's the foreigners here in RFC that take so much
>> interest in USA politics. Maybe they should focus more on their own
>> counties elections.
>
> The politics of the USA, UK, Scotland, Canada and to some degree Oz
> and NZ all interest me greatly. I am definitely concentrating on our
> elections in just under a month!!!
>
Is that why you spend your time down here running your ignorant yap on
OUR nation's business, whore?

**** your lying Goddamend piehole straight to HELL!

You worthless bitch!

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 9/26/2015 8:55 AM, Janet B wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:12:39 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:56:07 -0300, wrote:
>> snip
>>>
>>> Well oddly enough, I didn't despise his father, he had the good sense
>>> to know when to quit in Iraq.
>>
>> That was strangely out of character for him, I'll concede that. Makes
>> me wonder what the real reason was. Possibly they still had a use for
>> Saddam (whom Bush installed in Iraq to being with) and the regional
>> tensions in place at the time. IMO, he was far, far, far worse than
>> his son even had a hope of ever being. A truly evil sociopath. (You
>> won't see me describe anyone as evil very often either). But that's
>> all a whole other topic and by no means a small one, either.
>
> He was a long-time diplomat and had an understanding of the ways of
> power. He knew there was nothing to be gained by destabilizing the
> whole area.
> Janet US
>


He was instructed by our UN and NATO "allies" to cool it on Soddem
because THEY get most of their oil from that region, as in the lion's share.

Stop trying to rewrite history!



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 9/26/2015 9:18 AM, wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 08:56:56 -0600, Janet B >
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:10:35 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
>>> Bruce wrote:
>>>> It's not so self-evident if you voted for the man.
>>>
>>> GWB was ok. No better or worse than any other president we've had.
>>>
>>> Dem/liberals fought like crazy that the first election was fixed and
>>> Al Gore should have won. Bullshit...that weirdo lost fair and square.
>>> That doesn't explain why GWB won the re-election 4 years later.
>>>
>>> Funny to me how it's the foreigners here in RFC that take so much
>>> interest in USA politics. Maybe they should focus more on their own
>>> counties elections.
>>
>> they take interest because we can screw up the whole toy box.
>> Janet US
>
> I think too, it's partly that your system takes so long!

TOO ****ING DAM<NE BAD!

It's OUR system whore, not YOURS!

**** OFF WITH YOUR USELESS AND UNWANTED CRITIQUES!

> That last
> year of a presidency is totally eclipsed by electioneering.

NOT your problem you whining canuckleheaded ****!

> We are not liking the fact that our election will run for eleven weeks
> this time, a record. It will be a relief when October 19 comes, and
> goes

Bitch, bitch, bitch!!!!

Our system takes too long for poor widdle YOU!

Now your own does too.

You hypocritical old hag-wart!


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 9/26/2015 9:31 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-09-26 10:52 AM, Janet B wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 20:56:07 -0300, wrote:
>>
>> snip
>>>
>>> Well oddly enough, I didn't despise his father, he had the good sense
>>> to know when to quit in Iraq. GWB though, confused by talk of WOMD
>>> and with oil people pushing him, made a grievous error and I put 9/10s
>>> of the blame for the current state of the mid-east at his door.
>>
>> absolutely.
>
> What offended me most was the with us or with the terrorists rhetoric
> when he was looking for support to invade Iraq to disarm Saddam of that
> vast arsenal of WMDs that we did not believe he had.

Well you were flat ****ing WRONG, you insolent canuckleheaded MORON!

He DID have them!

They were trucked into...wait for it...SYRIA!!!!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-115519-3700r/

U.S. intelligence agencies have obtained satellite photographs of truck
convoys that were at several weapons sites in Iraq in the weeks before
U.S. military operations were launched, defense officials said yesterday.

The photographs indicate that Iraq was moving arms and equipment from
its known weapons sites, said officials who spoke on the condition of
anonymity.

According to one official, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency,
known as NGA, €œdocumented the movement of long convoys of trucks from
various areas around Baghdad to the Syrian border.€�

The official said the convoys are believed to include shipments of
sensitive armaments, including equipment used in making plastic
explosives and nuclear weapons.

About 380 tons of RDX and HMX, used in making such arms, were reported
missing from the Al-Qaqaa weapons facility, though the Pentagon and an
embedded NBC News correspondent said the facility appeared to have been
emptied by the time U.S. forces got there.

The photographs bolster the claims of Pentagon official John A. Shaw,
who told The Washington Times on Wednesday that recent intelligence
reports indicate Russian special forces units took part in a
sophisticated dispersal operation from January 2003 to March 2003 to
move key weapons out of Iraq.


> Most of the
> western countries knew that Saddam was a *******, but that he had his
> hands full dealing with even worse *******s in his country.

Oh boo ****ing hoo!

> They condemned him for using gas against internal enemies, but when he used
> it against Iranian forces they provided satellite intelligence about
> Iranian positions.

The Euro whores had vested business interests to protect, you ignoramus!

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...ssein-in-power

France
France controls over 22.5 percent of Iraq's imports.[1] French total
trade with Iraq under the oil-for-food program is the third largest,
totaling $3.1 billion since 1996, according to the United Nations.[2]
In 2001 France became Iraq's largest European trading partner. Roughly
60 French companies did an estimated $1.5 billion in trade with Baghdad
in 2001 under the U.N. oil-for-food program.[3]
France's largest oil company, Total Fina Elf, has negotiated extensive
oil contracts to develop the Majnoon and Nahr Umar oil fields in
southern Iraq. Both the Majnoon and Nahr Umar fields are estimated to
contain as much as 25 percent of the country's oil reserves. The two
fields purportedly contain an estimated 26 billion barrels of oil.[4]In
2002, the non-war price per barrel of oil was $25. Based on that average
these two fields have the potential to provide a gross return near $650
billion.
France's Alcatel company, a major telecom firm, is negotiating a $76
million contract to rehabilitate Iraq's telephone system.[5]
In 2001 French carmaker Renault SA sold $75 million worth of farming
equipment to Iraq.[6]
More objections have been lodged against French export contracts with
Iraq than any other exporting country under the oil-for-food program,
according to a report published by the London Times. In addition French
companies have signed contracts with Iraq worth more than $150 million
that are suspected of being linked to its military operations.[7]Some of
the goods offered by French companies to Iraq, detailed by UN documents,
include refrigerated trucks that can be used as storage facilities and
mobile laboratories for biological weapons.
Iraq owes France an estimated $6 billion in foreign debt accrued from
arms sales in the 1970s and '80s.[8]
From 1981 to 2001, according to the Stockholm International Peace
Research Institute (SIPRI), France was responsible for over 13 percent
of Iraq's arms imports.[9]
Germany
Direct trade between Germany and Iraq amounts to about $350 million
annually, and another $1 billion is reportedly sold through third
parties.[10]
It has recently been reported that Saddam Hussein has ordered Iraqi
domestic businesses to show preference to German companies as a reward
for Germany's "firm positive stand in rejecting the launching of a
military attack against Iraq." It was also reported that over 101 German
companies were present at the Baghdad Annual exposition.[11]
During the 35th Annual Baghdad International Fair in November 2002, a
German company signed a contract for $80 million for 5,000 cars and
spare parts.[12]
In 2002, DaimlerChrysler was awarded over $13 million in contracts for
German trucks and spare parts.[13]
Germany is owed billions by Iraq in foreign debt generated during the
1980's.[14]
German officials are investigating a German corporation accused of
illegally channeling weapons to Iraq via Jordan. The equipment in
question is used for boring the barrels of large cannons and is
allegedly intended for Saddam Hussein's Al Fao Supercannon
project.[15]An article in the German daily Tageszeitung reported that of
the more than 80 German companies that have done business with Baghdad
since around 1975 and have continued to do so up until 2001, many have
supplied whole systems or components for weapons of mass destruction.
Russia
Russia controls roughly 5.8 percent of Iraq's annual imports.[16] Under
the U.N. oil-for-food program, Russia's total trade with Iraq was
somewhere between $530 million and $1 billion for the six months ending
in December of 2001.[17]
According to the Russian Ambassador to Iraq, Vladimir Titorenko, new
contracts worth another $200 million under the U.N. oil-for-food program
are to be signed over the next three months.[18]
Russia's LUKoil negotiated a $4 billion, 23-year contract in 1997 to
rehabilitate the 15 billion-barrel West Qurna field in southern Iraq.
Work on the oil field was expected to commence upon cancellation of U.N.
sanctions on Iraq. The deal is currently on hold.[19]
In October 2001, Salvneft, a Russian-Belarus company, negotiated a $52
million service contract to drill at the Tuba field in Southern Iraq.[20]
In April 2001, Russia's Zaruezhneft and Tatneft companies received a
service contract to drill in the Saddam, Kirkuk, and Bai Hassan fields
to rehabilitate the fields and reduce water incursion. Together the
deals were valued at $13.2 million.[21]
A future $40 billion Iraqi-Russian economic agreement, reportedly signed
in 2002, would allow for extensive oil exploration opportunities
throughout western Iraq.[22] The proposal calls for 67 new projects,
over a 10-year time frame, to explore and further develop fields in
southern Iraq and the Western Desert, including the Suba, Luhais, West
Qurna, and Rumaila projects. Additional projects added to the deal
include second-phase construction of a pipeline running from southern to
northern Iraq, and extensive drilling and gas projects. Work on these
projects would commence upon cancellation of sanctions.[23]
Russia's Gazprom Company over the past few years has signed contracts
worth $18 million to repair gas stations in Iraq.[24]
The former Soviet Union was the premier supplier of Iraqi arms. From
1981 to 2001, Russia supplied Iraq with 50 percent of its arms.[25]
Soviet-era debt of $7 billion through $8 billion was generated by arms
sales to Iraq during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.
Three Russian firms are suspected of selling electronic jamming
equipment, antitank missiles and thousands of night-vision goggles to
Iraq in violation of U.N. sanctions.[26] Two of the companies
identified are Aviaconversiya and KBP Tula.
China
China controls roughly 5.8 percent of Iraq's annual imports.[27]
China National Oil Company, partnered with China North Industries Corp.,
negotiated a 22-year-long deal for future oil exploration in the Al
Ahdab field in southern Iraq.[28]
In recent years, the Chinese Aero-Technology Import-Export Company
(CATIC) has been contracted to sell "meteorological satellite" and
"surface observation" equipment to Iraq. The U.N. oil-for-food program
approved this contract.[29]
CATIC also won approval from the U.N. in July 2000 to sell $2 million
worth of fiber optic cables. This and similar contracts approved were
disguised as telecommunications gear. These cables can be used for
secure data and communications links between national command and
control centers and long-range search radar, targeting radar, and
missile-launch units, according to U.S. officials. In addition, China
National Electric Wire & Cable and China National Technical Import
Telecommunications Equipment Company are believed to have sold Iraq $6
million and $15.5 million worth of communications equipment and other
unspecified supplies, respectively.[30]
According to a report from SIPRI, from 1981 to 2001, China was the
second largest supplier of weapons and arms to Iraq, supplying over 18
percent of Iraq's weapons imports.[31]


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---