Nutball Scrawl Wall!

hsi1138 · Guest

Does anyone remember the anti-France website John and Ken talked about yesterday? I can't find it for the life of me. Something about frog wieners or something.

Thanks!

Don of the Dial · Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2003 6:42 pm Post subject: Zee list

Hi-

I dont know the list site, but this may amuse you till you can find it.

DON

VIVA LA FRANCE!

And some of our fellow countryman are worrying about the French as our ally? I do know that most
French I've met and had contact with, have manners and body odor that parallel their fighting ability. I
feel better not having their support, diplomatic or otherwise.

-Gallic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history,
France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.
-Hundred Years War - Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates
The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a
Frenchman."
-Italian Wars - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting
Italians.
-Wars of Religion - France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots
-Thirty Years War - France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway.
Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her.
-War of Devolution - Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux.
-The Dutch War - Tied
-War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War Lost, but claimed as
a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height
of French military power.
-War of the Spanish Succession - Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a
Marlborough, which they have loved every since.
-American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France
claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de
Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; "France only wins when
America does most of the fighting."
-French Revolution - Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French.
-The Napoleonic Wars - Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a
Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer.
-The Franco-Prussian War - Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly
girl home alone on a Saturday night.
-World War I - Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of
French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her
"Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the
French bloodline.
-World War II - Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish
learning the Horst Wessel Song.
-War in Indochina - Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu
-Algerian Rebellion - Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim
force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; "We can always beat the
French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch,
Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux.
-War on Terrorism - France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and
Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge
in a McDonald's.

The question for any country silly enough to count on the French should not be "Can we count on the
French?" but rather "How long until France collapses?"

"Hold your friends close. Hold your enemies closer. Hold the French underwater"- Machiavelli

John K. Fellman
Professor of Postharvest Physiology
Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture
Washington State University
Pullman Washington USA
voice:
fax:

Don of the Dial · Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2003 7:17 pm Post subject: eeeven moore

And there is another one that someone sent me about France already organizing their Surrender delegation for the Iraqis.

I am looking for it.

Ben · Guest

Don of the Dial

IN REMEMBRANCE

Liberty, Equality, Fraternity!

Does the French nation recall that slogan? The current French tolerance
of and indifference to the wave of attacks upon French Jews speaks
clearly of the decline of the French national character.

The French have forgotten! Two hundred and some odd years ago the
suffering French populace erupted in revolution against tyranny. They
cried for and fought for liberty, fraternity, equality for all in every aspect of
French society.

The French have forgotten! But I remember! I still have in my mind the
heartbreaking image of the Parisian gentleman from whose eyes the tears
fell copiously as he watched the Nazi troops marching triumphantly into
Paris. The face of that Frenchman still lives in my mind sixty years later. It
is the same as the faces of so many French Jews today.

The French have forgotten! But I remember! I remember the ecstasy, the
flowers, the kisses with which the French people greeted their American
and British liberators from Nazi terror.

The French have forgotten! They have forgotten the dehumanizing result
of terror upon themselves. They have forgotten the shame of Vichy
France. Those who watch with indifference the attacks upon their
neighbors sink into degeneracy themselves.

The French have forgotten brotherhood and love of others than
themselves. They have forgotten equal justice. They have forgotten that a
nation without strength of morality and character is a nation already in the
lower depths of degradation.

So, just as the Swiss were part of the Nazi problem sixty years ago, the
French are part of the problem of world terrorism today. As the French
casually watch their Jewish citizens attacked let them remember how they,
the French, acquiesced in cowardice at the rape of Czechoslovakia by the
Nazis in 1938, only to suffer under the Nazi heel so soon after.

My contempt for present day France is accompanied by great regret. We
gave the lives of American boys to save them twice. They have forgotten.
However, we Americans have not forgotten. All Americans with integrity of
character must boycott France. I hope large numbers of you will join me in
this.

Cheryl · O.J. Simpson Juror Joined: 26 Aug 2002 Posts: 1193

The liberal Joe Lieberman actually wrote this?

Well, I'm in shock, I just can't believe it.

Cheryl · O.J. Simpson Juror Joined: 26 Aug 2002 Posts: 1193

I can't believe it.

I hope somebody gave it to the French ambassador.

This is just too good to be true.

Really?

shadow · Guest

Don of the Dial · Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2003 1:13 am Post subject: TIP

THANKS.
OK. I pulled his name off and let the rest of the post stand, except for the part about sending duplicate e-mails copies.

Caguama · Joined: 15 Oct 2002 Posts: 29

What is the reason for all this animosity towards France, just for having a different idea to the Iraqi issue than we do?

They are far from alone. Check out China, Russia, Germany, Canada and even Turkey remains in question. The list opposing action right now is far longer than the one backing immediate action.

As for the Hollywood types, the Pope is sending an envoy to ask Bush to back down, William A. Niskanen, the Chairman of the very conservative think tank, the Cato Insitute and former advisor to President Reagan, opposes going to war at this time along with the former Four Star Air Force General during the Gulf War, Tony McPeak. A high ranking envoy of the State Department has resigned over the reckless handing of this situation.

In a different post, Cheryl mentioned the Frontline show on the war and the New American Century, as covered by J and K. Did any of you watch that show or go to frontline.org to see it (it's just as easy to go there than to hunt for some France hate site)? It just might be filled with good information for all of us to absorb. It may even help you understand why so many nations might be opposed to this military action right now. But I guess putting energy into being angry at France is more fun and a lot easier.

As for Joe Lieberman, why wouldn't one of you at least go to his official website and see if that letter is posted or referenced there. Of course it is and it is another internet hoax, but it is just so much more fun to spread that kind of garbage than to deal with facts.

The CIA and FBI admit they still aren't sharing intelligence. Bush is blaming the GOP Congress for not funding Homeland Security suffciently, and they just passed the bill two weeks ago?!?! Twenty-four of the states are in serious fiscal crisis, 13 led by GOP Governors. This year's budget deficit will be at an all time high, even without the war. The White House just jumped the estimate for the first few months in Iraq from $45B to $95B. (That is getting a lot closer to the $100B to $200B others have been estimating all along.) Our national debt ceiling has to be raised by Congress shortly (to an all time record number of trillions), or we will begin defaulting on our obligations. Right now they are juggling the books to postpone the inevitable. It's gonna make bad press.

In many areas of the country, gasoline is at record high prices, with supplies at levels not seen since 1973. Spot natural gas is at all time high prices. These do not bode well for business profits or discretionary household spending or the travel industry this summer.

There was a run on duct tape and plastic sheeting after the government rose the risk level for terror to orange. Two days after that, it was revealed that the informant failed the lie detector test, the primary reason for the elevated status, in the mean time many people were paniced. And just a day or two ago it was dropped back to yellow at the same time a communication from al Qaida calling for an all out effort to attack Americans here and abroad was released.

And we are worried about France! Hell, they, and others, supplied us with hard intelligence indicating the seriousness and likely methods of the al Qaida and the 9/11 attacks. And within two days of 9/11, their main paper had the headline "We are all Americans now!" But we have squandered that good will, by bullying, insulting and dismissing our closest friends and allies. And never forget, France is who helped us break from England, those many years ago. And they warned us about getting into Vietnam. We need these people, our arrogance just might be our demise. History is littered with failed powers who thought they could do it all.

Come on people, these are very serious times and dealing with more hate and a few 15 second "feel good" sound bites just won't cut it any more. Focus on the very difficult job we have ahead of us.

Didn't we learn anything from spending a summer dissecting Condit as the al Qaida was finishing up it's training and plans for their big day. All the while our government sat with various elements of information of our own and from our allies, along with untranslated messages confirming the date of the attacks as Washington vacationed that warm August and early September. While the nation and the press wondered about Modesto.

PS I just noticed that while I was composing this response another poster did the research on the hoax and that confirms my observation on that.

I just thought of something else that I bet many of you didn't know. When Powell was testifying recently before the UN, he referenced a newly released and distributed British intelligence report about the evils of Iraq. What came out a couple days later in the British press, and confirmed by Downing Street, that document was not from the British intelligence, but it came from one of Blair's guys at Downing street. And it was a cut an paste job. The main section was a direct lifting of a magazine article written several years ago by a California grad student. Punctuation errors and all. And what is even worse, the information the guy used to write his article was from documents taken by the UN after the first Gulf War. So here we had Powell referencing this supposedly high level analysis of the current situation in Iraq before all the world and in reality it was based on 12 year old information! Powell did confirm the report's pedigree later, when quizzed by Tim Russert. Check the transcrips from a couple weeks back, if you think this is false.

And it looks like a classified US document has just surfaced referencing our directing US intelligence agencies to spy on Security Council Members' communications including phone calls and e-mails. That should help our cause.

Cheryl · O.J. Simpson Juror Joined: 26 Aug 2002 Posts: 1193

with egg on my face

Yep, Lieberman thing's a hoax, well content is arguably accurate, but not authored by the senator. To Don's credit, once he learned this wasn't Lieberman he immediately acknowledged that and corrected the post. Actually he didn't make a big deal of the supposed author, that would be me. I didn't check this out either, despite my shocked disbelief about Lieberman writing it.

I can't help but feel some resentment toward the French myself, it was very easy for them to show support on 9/11. Thousands of innocent people were just murdered, there was no downside, of course they will show support by paying lip service to their condemnation of the act. When it comes down to a tough stance against those who refuse to disarm, do not comply with UN resolutions, continue to play games with inspectors, moving their weapons capable of mass destruction from one location to another, the French, as usual will take the easy road and opt for continued inspections, with a deadline of.....?? 10-20 years? They may have "warned" us about Viet Nam, and offered assistance with England(funny, that just shows to go you, one day your enemy, the next your most trusted ally) but that does not compare to what we did for them in WWII, if weren't for our help, they'd be speaking German. This is where they could've shown real support, we are not blindly rushing into a war without just cause. It seems to me the sentiment among the french leader and his people is anti-America. We don't need them, yet we continue to try and salvage relations, they will need us again one day, I'm quite certain. I have read that they do have reliance on the oil they receive from their friends in Iraq, at, shall we say, very reasonable prices. The anger is leveled at France, I believe, because they have been helped by us, and have stabbed us in the back more than once. As President Bush so clearly stated "either you're with us, or you're against us" The French do not support us.

There will always be dissention in times of war(although, we are not at war) but that's a here and there kind of thing, with France, it seems they always like us when it's easy to do so. Speaking of dissention, and those so concerned with the innocent lives in Iraq, where was their opposition to the bombings ordered by Clinton?

As to the US "spying" on UN members, if that's true, that would not be good public relations to say the least. I would also assert the same for Middle East countries using their oil wealth to pressure UN members who are undecided to oppose the US.

On the economy, I too am not happy with the progress. I do think a war with Iraq would vastly improve that situation. With the lift of sanctions and the oil that would then be available to market. It would'nt just benefit us, but the rest of the world economically anyway.

Caguama · Joined: 15 Oct 2002 Posts: 29

I have no intention of responding to every post addressing my message. I hadn't even intended to get as lengthy as I did initially. I expressed my thinking and relayed some of the reality of what others are thinking and saying.

But I really must challenge your comment that they only gave us "lip service". We have no idea what most Frenchmen thought or think. Many seem too busy telling us for them, instead of asking. I do remember citizens bringing flowers and other items to our embassies in France, along with the tears streaming down their faces. Within the last three months, France lost one of its tankers to al Qaida terror and French citzens died in NY on 9/11. So they understand. The French currently have troops deployed in the Irvory Coast. The French fought with us in the first Gulf War.

As to doing the tough work, I distinctly remember copying an article covering the fact that France went way out of its way to get our attention over the pending al Qaida actions against us. Why aren't we thanking them for that?

And it still begs the question why only anger at France. I again submit they may be aware to the things presented on the Frontline Show. We want the world to be filled with strong independent democracies, and when these other nations deploy policies which reflect the desires of their population, we dismiss them as being lazy, selfish or misdirected, if they don't agree with ours.

As for Turkey, if Sadam is such a menace to his neighbors, why are over 95% of the Turks opposed to this war? They aren't in favor of Sadam and they want continued strong UN inspections and the destruction of WMDs. And Turkey has voted down letting us use their soil for any war effort. And they claim there will not be another vote any time soon, if ever. I guess they don't want us bombing the millions of Iraqis, 50% of whom are under the age of 15.

Chuck · Guest

Very well written Caguama. Very well, indeed. I applaude you. You have passion and conviction, which I find honorable. I see you have spent many hours doing research. Unfortunately, there are a few points that you (overlooked?). I also see you spent more than an hour writing your viewpoint. Sometimes though, less is more.

Now, the sentiments that are going around lately are quite similar to those during pre WWII. Germany/Hitler was no "real" threat. If we had acted sooner, perhaps we could have saved millions of jews. If we had acted sooner, perhaps we could have saved millions of $$ rebuilding Europe.

On to Vietnam. That lush "French Colony." Seems to me, if it weren't for the French, the whole thing might have been avoided. But that, I admit is pure speculation. As to our efforts there. I do believe they are much better off today than they were in 1960. My opinion.

The Cold War. I remember all the doomsdayers back then too. Reagan is a cowboy/warmonger taking us into WWIII. Are you old enough to remember those things? Or you just didn't recall them. As far as I can see, WWIII never happened. And the world is free of the Soviet Union.

Gulf War I. I seem to recall the doomsdayers again. WWIII, millions of bodybags. That "war" lasted only a few days. Very few.

Kosovo. Silence from the doomsdayers. Hmmm. Oh yeah, that was a NATO thing, had nothing to do with Clinton.

Bombing of Iraq in 1998. Silence from the doomsdayers. Hmmm.

Now we are at present day. Cowboy, warmonger. WWIII, oil interests. What happened to fighting Al-Queda??? All the same 15 second (soundbites) was that what you called them?

Well, while you were sleeping in your safe home here in the great USA, we have been working very hard at uncovering the rest of Al-Queda. In fact, we just nabbed Bin Laden's top Lt. The mastermind behind 9/11? Could it be that Osama is not too far from our grasps afterall? I guess we are capable of working two fronts at once. (remember, Germany AND Japan in WWII)

OK, how long do we wait? What is a sufficient amount of time in your opinion. One more year? Two? Five? When he fires a nuclear weapon at Israel? Turkey? Gasses a million more people?

I have even heard people call Bush worse than Hitler. Doesn't that bother you in the least? Why don't you say anything about that?

Well, I have gone on far longer than I intended, but now I see how your passion got you going as well. I retract my earlier statement "sometimes less is more." (well, sometimes it is)

Chuck · Guest

Caguama · Joined: 15 Oct 2002 Posts: 29

I'll bite on this one. But I will not chase this thing into the ground it is endless and futile. Honest, sincere people can come away with different conclusions, while looking at the same information.

I really am not interested in covering every single point everyone can think of. I have many more items I could have added myself. And as to why I didn't cover every single point imaginable over internal and external events both historic and current, well think about it. Additionally, I can't begin to imagine what specific detail someone might think should be addressed. Esp those which will be presented as some claimed failure of my arguments or will somehow be purported to demonstrate a lack of consitency on my part.

As for the Hitler comments about Bush, of course, I think they are irresponsible. They are every bit as responsible as his public comments referring to the President of N. Korea as "pygmy" or Rumsfeld's comment about some of our allies being "irrelevant".

I have also heard some self proclaimed Conservatives demand the immediate nuking of the Middle East, I am wise enough to understand that does not represent the bulk of the people who identify themself with that political philosophy. Where is your condemnation of those remarks?

As for your concerns about nuclear attack, why your silence on N. Korea? I guess you see the imposibility of the task of addressing each detail.

Some very credible people think the collapse of the USSR and therefore the evaporation of the Cold War, was due to their entanglements in Afghanistan, their failure at Chernobyl breaking the national psychie and simply trying to hold together an Empire. With the help of our military expansion.

As for your "where were they when" comments, I ask you, where are the folks who attacked Clinton when we went after al Qaida with the cruise missile attacks and the asprin factory then and now, for that matter? Why didn't they demand the immediate deployment of US troops instead of calling it his "wag the dog" effort to divert us from his problems with Monica. And totally mocked the military response. And somehow blaming him for the military targets we hit which were identified by our CIA etc.

Why aren't these people asking if Bush's newest "product", as the Iraq war run up, was identified by Andrew Card. You know, we don't roll out a new product until the Fall comment? Is just that, a product and perhaps a way of keeping peoples' eyes off of the domestic economic and financial problems we face? You know, the wag the dog thing. See holes can be poked in everything.

And if Iraq is such an immediate danger, and we can't wait a few more weeks or months, why did W not cancel his month long August vacation and start the effort August 1st, July 1st or June 1st, instead of September 12, one day following the anniversary of the attacks on NY and DC.

On and on it goes...

Caguama · Joined: 15 Oct 2002 Posts: 29

I will edit my posts as I see fit. I will never drop something for convenience, to save face nor will I revise a post to reverse the thrust of my remarks.

I will make the changes to correct typos and lousy spelling and phrasing or to more clearly and accurately match my writing to my thoughts.

"Chuck", I edited the post to point out that I will not respond to every challenge well before you posted your remarks and therefore before my having read them.

Thank you for the compliments on my ability to express myself.

While you were commenting on my supposed unwillingness to answer your post, I was busy responding to it. Please try to keep your comments to your thoughts and to not start again to guess my thinking and my motives for deciding not to cover something, it really would be appreciated.

Thank you!

"Chuck" · Guest

Caguama · Joined: 15 Oct 2002 Posts: 29

Just because YOU hit the submit button on your posting before I did, it doesn't mean I wasn't inside of my document editing while being interrupted by a phone call prior to my finally submitting my revised version of the post. (We do have cable modems in Oregon, you see)

Once it returned me to the board, I noticed your post and responded to it.

And why would I have made that change so I could avoid responding to you when I did respond! You do seem to have overlooked the fact that I did respond to it! Despite your prediction I would not! Masked, I mean Nick, I mean Chuck you are just too transparent...Nice try!

And funny that the weenie site "Ben" suggests doesn't seem to have any postings from him, but there is a Nick from California....hhhmmm how odd is that!

"Chuck" · Guest

I never knew you were from Oregon. NOW it all makes sense.

Now, how in the WORLD do the names on this site, frogweenies OR any other site for that matter have ANYthing to do with ANYthing? What does any of that have anything to do with the topic at hand. Other than your diversion. You crack me up.

And your obsession with names is a hoot. "Caguama" whoever you are.

p.s. the frog site only goes back about 20 hours or so. I have been on that site (obviously you have too LOL) there have actually been 3 separate "Nick" name posts (which one is who??), 2 Bens (imagine that), and a host full of other loons. There was also a Cheryl and a Don too. I wonder if they are from here as well. No Caguama's yet. But then again, who cares?

God Bless, Caguama. Or does God offend you? (I wouldn't want to offend you, now)

LOL, you really are a hoot. I do like you.

Caguama · Joined: 15 Oct 2002 Posts: 29

You continue to dance past your false accusation that I was mysteriously trying to create a cover by editing a post so I, for some reason, wouldn't have to answer your comments.

Here are two facts for you to consider:

1) As I have done many times before, if I elected to not respond to you, I could and would do that, independent of editing anything.

2) I responded!

Before you begin worrying yourself about my reasons for introducing additional items, perhaps you, the champion of straw men, should work on your own behavior first! ROFLOL

Scarecrow · Guest

You protest WAY too much, my friend. Why is that? (that is rhetorical)

Caguama · Joined: 15 Oct 2002 Posts: 29

Tinman · Guest

Caguama · Joined: 15 Oct 2002 Posts: 29

Don of the Dial · Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2003 7:17 pm Post subject: authenticity and posting times

Before I go through these latest messages, I want to write that I am taking everyone's word on the non-Leiberman issue.

Also the posting times on here have very little basis in reality, so don't set your clock by them.

Chuck : why would screen names on this J&K website show up on the frogweenie website?