http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Killer bees are here to sting again - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/35f8884779cb87af?hl=en
* Nuclear Crisis in Japan - 17 messages, 11 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/4e19044edc193817?hl=en
* Outrageous (operator assisted) phone charges - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e2bf0b6ebd705505?hl=en
* Can you have sex with an angel? - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3b65919b70429c58?hl=en
* Bad Housekeeper needs tips. - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/070aed9aa5fbdc1e?hl=en
* Damn Pedestrians! - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a4486f5ab89c33d5?hl=en
* If every roof was a solar panel - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/dd0a5af9cc4337f6?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Killer bees are here to sting again
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/35f8884779cb87af?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Fri, Mar 18 2011 11:04 pm
From: Buster Norris
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 22:28:51 -0700 (PDT), Tater Gumfries
<gumfries@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mar 18, 10:07�pm, Buster Norris <Bus...@Buster.Com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 08:44:05 -0700 (PDT), Tater Gumfries
>>
>> <g
>
>Gordon said somethin smart and funny. You vomited out the usual crap.
>
>You're no one.
And I like it that way...............
But you're not not one!!!!!!! You're Johnnie!!!!!!!!!!
From: Baldin Lee Pramer <baldinleepramer@yahoo.com>
From: Monsignor Tartarus Sanctus <tartarus@rome.com>
From: Tartarus <tartarus@rome.com>
From: Tater Gumfries <tater@kernsholler.net>
From: Tater Gumfries <TaterGumfries@usa.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.138.19.107
From: Baldin Lee Pramer <baldinleepramer@yahoo.com>
From: Monsignor Tartarus Sanctus <tartarus@rome.com>
From: Sri Bodhi Prana <bodhi@mail2bombay.com>
From: Tartarus <tartarus@rome.com>
From: Tater Gumfries <TaterGumfries@usa.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.225.11.38
From: Baldin Lee Pramer <baldinleepramer@yahoo.com>
From: Monsignor Tartarus Sanctus <tartarus@rome.com>
From: Sri Bodhi Prana <bodhi@mail2bombay.com>
From: Tartarus <tartarus@rome.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.218.164.153
From: Baggi <BaggiBumschaudner@gmail.com>
From: Baldin Lee Pramer <baldinleepramer@yahoo.com>
From: Monsignor Tartarus Sanctus <tartarus@rome.com>
From: Tartarus <tartarus@rome.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.218.170.32
Google Profile:
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en&enc_user=aPeBnxUAAACt8q8X_hh5lAgeZWKUTajQZk8LRyw6Fzc364xXu3mYhA
http://www.kernsholler.net
Registrant: John Starrett
3500 Clay St.
Denver, Colorado 80211
303-242-6285
Real Email: jstarret@nmt.edu
http://whois.domaintools.com/kernsholler.net
http://www.aurapiercing.com
Registrant: StarrBoard
1226 Calle de Lago
Socorro, New Mexico 87801
Administrative,
Technical Contact: Starrett, John David (Age 57)
StarrBoard
1226 Calle de Lago
Socorro, New Mexico 87801 (Home address)
575-838-0915 (Home telephone, Qwest)
Real Email: jstarret@nmt.edu
Real Email: jstarret@sdc.org
http://whois.domaintools.com/aurapiercing.com
Employer: New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology
--- [Courtesy of Buster Norris] --------------------------
Johnnie is in the Mathematics Dept, extension 5763.
http://www.nmt.edu/directory
http://infohost.nmt.edu/~jstarret/
"I am an associate professor of mathematics at the New Mexico
Institute of Mining and Technology. My main area of research is in
knot theory and the topology of strange attractors."
Office: 240 Weir
Email: jstarret@nmt.edu
Phone: 575-835-5763
His boss is Chairman/Professor Stone, William D. extension 5786,
email: wdstone@nmt.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Nuclear Crisis in Japan
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/4e19044edc193817?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 12:12 am
From: "DGDevin"
"Rod Speed" wrote in message news:8uih4rFmmhU1@mid.individual.net...
>> flaws which have been revealed as brutally real in the past week. But
>> other than that, no big deal.
> Irrelevant to that silly shit of yours about corporate profits.
News flash, Einstein, it isn't my silly shit, it's admissions from the
Japanese nuclear industry that they concealed hundreds of accidents and
falsified safety inspections and repairs going back decades, the top men at
the company that operates the Fukushima plant had to resign over it. Then
later they admitted they still hadn't told the govt. everything, the
Fukushima plant had a series of incidents including a critical fault in one
reactor that lasted seven hours. And why did they do that? Lower costs =
higher profits, nothing more complicated than that.
Now if you'll excuse me, I've realized I mistook you for one of the
grownups, no point wasting any more time on a conversation with someone who
thinks in bumper stickers.
== 2 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 2:32 am
From: "Rod Speed"
DGDevin wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> DGDevin wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> DGDevin wrote
>>>>> Warnings about the vulnerability of the design were first raised in the 1970s, and the reactors at this plant are
>>>>> already well past
>>>>> their intended design life yet they were kept in service because
>>>>> corporate profits were put ahead of public safety.
>>>> Nope, because there is nothing special about the intended life.
>>> If you ignore that the Mark I design had safety flaws addressed in later designs,
>> All nukes and anything else that major have done too.
>>> flaws which have been revealed as brutally real in the past week. But other than that, no big deal.
>> Irrelevant to that silly shit of yours about corporate profits.
> News flash, Einstein,
Flashing is illegal, fuckwit child.
> it isn't my silly shit, it's admissions from the Japanese nuclear industry that they concealed hundreds of accidents
> and falsified safety inspections and repairs going back decades, the top men at the company that operates the
> Fukushima plant had to resign over it.
Irrelevant to that silly shit of yours about corporate profits.
> Then later they admitted they still hadn't told the govt. everything, the Fukushima plant had a series of incidents
> including a critical fault in one reactor that lasted seven hours.
Irrelevant to that silly shit of yours about corporate profits.
> And why did they do that?
Because thats how Japs operate, fuckwit child.
<reams of your juvenile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
== 3 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 5:02 am
From: "trader4@optonline.net"
On Mar 18, 10:02 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> DGDevin wrote
>
> > Rod Speed wrote
> >> DGDevin wrote
> >>>>> So far? So far it is a cluster fuck. The situation is largely
> >>>>> out of control. The complex is a total writeoff and will cost
> >>>>> billions to clean up. And that is the best case.
> >>>> And that affects you exactly how? Did they ask you to pay for the clean up?
> >>> Who do you think is paying for the U.S. military's efforts to offer aid in Japan if not the American taxpayer?
> >> Thats peanuts as part of the US budget.
> > So is taxpayer support for public broadcasting, and yet the Republicans in Congress figure its essential to end it as
> > part of saving the budget.
>
> Your problem.
Last time I checked, the US assistance to Japan is focused on the
direct
effects of the earthquake and tsuanmi, which are far greater than any
effect the nuclear accident has had. Of course some would like to
make
it sound like the nuclear part is the worst part, but anyone paying
attention
to the news would know that we have 10,000+ dead from the direct
effects of the earthquake and tsunami. So far, what's the nuclear
death
toll? Zero.
>
> >>> U.S. auto plants are shutting down because they can't get parts from
> >>> Japan, do you imagine that won't have a serious impact in the U.S.?
> >> Corse it wont, they will just get them from china and korea etc instead.
> > Then why are plants closing if it's just a matter of ordering the parts from someone else?
>
> Because it takes a bit of time to organise a change of supplier like that.
Any plant closings due to parts shortages are attributable to the
earthquake,
not the nuclear power issue. Bottom line, they lost part of their
generating
capacity. Show us a credible study that says if the power came from
other
sources, say coal or even solar, that the power situation as of now
would be
radically different. Or do you believe solar panels on the roofs of
collapsed
buildings just keep on sending power through transmission towers that
have toppled over.
>
> >>> Japan is America's most important ally in Asia, but for years to
> >>> come they're going to be focused inward, rebuilding from this
> >>> horrible disaster,
> >> And that is likely to be good for their economy, because otherwise their lost
> >> decade could very well have ended up as a lost quarter century instead.
> > It's only a few years short of being that now, which is why the Japanese have largely changed the name to The Lost
> > Years, it isn't over yet.
>
> Time will tell if this beings an end to it.
It's quite amazing how some of the anti-nukes can drag all kinds of
absurd
side issues into the discussion, isn't it?
>
> >>> is that unlikely to effect U.S. foreign policy in that part of the world?
> >> Yep. It wont have any effect on that.
> > So all those efforts to sign up Asian nations to resist China's efforts to increasingly throw its weight around
>
> Pure fantasy.
>
> > won't be impacted by the most powerful economy in that group of nations being unable to participate?
Pure fantasy X2. Another lame attempt to try to link all kinds of
crap
by the anti-nuke nuts.
>
> You aint established that Japan wont be able to
> continue to do what it has already been doing.
>
> > Check the battery in your crystal ball.
>
> Dont have one.
>
> >>> While I agree that a rush to judgment should be avoided, it is hard
> >>> to ignore that these particular reactors have caused trouble before.
> >> And the terminal stupidity of building nukes that can melt down in a very earthquake prone zone when there are nukes
> >> that cant melt down like the Canadian CANDUs in spades.
> > If AECL was a publically traded company I'd suspect you of holding a lot of stock.
>
> More fool you.
>
> >>> Warnings about the vulnerability of the design were first raised in the 1970s, and the reactors at this plant are
> >>> already well past
> >>> their intended design life yet they were kept in service because
> >>> corporate profits were put ahead of public safety.
> >> Nope, because there is nothing special about the intended life.
> > If you ignore that the Mark I design had safety flaws addressed in later designs,
>
> All nukes and anything else that major have done too.
>
> > flaws which have been revealed as brutally real in the past week. But other than that, no big deal.
>
> Irrelevant to that silly shit of yours about corporate profits.
And irrelevant to the accident as we know it so far. No one, other
than the
anti-nuke armchair experts, has said any design issues specific to
these
reactors were the cause of the accident. After a full investigation,
it
could very well turn out that the biggest issue was where the diesel
generators were located and how they were protected. And I would
not be surprised to see that reactors of other design were not
built with similar short comings. But we won't know that until there
is a full investigation, something some of us here obviously don't
want to see happen because they already claim to know so much.
== 4 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 5:24 am
From: "trader4@optonline.net"
On Mar 18, 1:02 pm, Smitty Two <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> In article
> <f727d4fa-c428-41d6-9f42-63b09c38c...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> "trad...@optonline.net" <trad...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > Yeah, no need for an investiagtion to figure out what happened
>
> Wasn't needed for 9/11, so shouldn't be necessary for this. Just clean
> up the debris and haul it off to the dump.
Are you now claiming there was no investigation of 9/11? Sounds
like you're a truther, which shows where you're coming from. Of
course
the real truth is investigators had full access to the building
debris
prior to it being hauled away. Some of it is still in their
possession.
== 5 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 6:25 am
From: Smitty Two
In article
<318d7936-08cf-4752-8479-6582908879ca@r13g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
"trader4@optonline.net" <trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
> On Mar 18, 1:02 pm, Smitty Two <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <f727d4fa-c428-41d6-9f42-63b09c38c...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > "trad...@optonline.net" <trad...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > > Yeah, no need for an investiagtion to figure out what happened
> >
> > Wasn't needed for 9/11, so shouldn't be necessary for this. Just clean
> > up the debris and haul it off to the dump.
>
> Are you now claiming there was no investigation of 9/11? Sounds
> like you're a truther, which shows where you're coming from. Of
> course
> the real truth is investigators had full access to the building
> debris
> prior to it being hauled away. Some of it is still in their
> possession.
I've never made any secret of my contempt for the official 9/11 story.
Lots of crackpots in my camp, and a lot of non-crackpots too. Every
intelligent open-minded person knows that it was an inside job. No plane
fragments found at the Pentagon, no reason for building 7 to collapse, 1
and 2 came down as carbon copies of demo'd buildings, Bush on video
saying he saw the planes hit the buildings *before* those videos had
been broadcast, broadcast reports of collapses before they actually
happened, no military interception of commercial airliners flying off
course for hours, ad infinitum.
But g'head, you just keep waving the american flag.
== 6 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 7:16 am
From: "trader4@optonline.net"
On Mar 19, 9:25 am, Smitty Two <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> In article
> <318d7936-08cf-4752-8479-658290887...@r13g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> "trad...@optonline.net" <trad...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > On Mar 18, 1:02 pm, Smitty Two <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <f727d4fa-c428-41d6-9f42-63b09c38c...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > "trad...@optonline.net" <trad...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > > > Yeah, no need for an investiagtion to figure out what happened
>
> > > Wasn't needed for 9/11, so shouldn't be necessary for this. Just clean
> > > up the debris and haul it off to the dump.
>
> > Are you now claiming there was no investigation of 9/11? Sounds
> > like you're a truther, which shows where you're coming from. Of
> > course
> > the real truth is investigators had full access to the building
> > debris
> > prior to it being hauled away. Some of it is still in their
> > possession.
>
> I've never made any secret of my contempt for the official 9/11 story.
> Lots of crackpots in my camp, and a lot of non-crackpots too. Every
> intelligent open-minded person knows that it was an inside job.
No person believing in the inside job theory fits my definition of
intelligent. Open minded to wild conspiracy theories, yes.
> No plane
> fragments found at the Pentagon,
Lie #1. There is a photo widely available on the internet of a
large piece of fuselage with the airline colors clearly visible.
Plenty of other debris was recovered as well.
Beyond the lie, comes the methods of the truthers. It would
not matter what was or was not found, it would never be right.
If there is debris, it's too big, too much, it was staged. If there
is less visible debris, then there should have been more,
hence no plane crashed.
> no reason for building 7 to collapse,
Lie #2
no reason other than it was hit by large amounts of debris
from the WTC collapse, suffered structural damage, and
had fires raging for most of the day. Just because we
don't have perfect answers for every detail doesn't equate
to conspiracy.
>< 1
> and 2 came down as carbon copies of demo'd buildings,
Lie #3.
Here's a Youtube video of a whole series of buildings that
were brought down by controlled demolition.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK50So-yYRU
None of them
are carbon copies of the WTC. They differ even among
themselves. But almost all either start from the bottom
of the building, or the center of the building, or the whole
building collapse initiates at the same time. None
starts exactly where a 767 entered the building and then
cascades downward as a progressive, floor by floor
collapse.
As an intelligent person, tell us how one would place
explosives in exactly the place that the 767's hit
the building, so the collapse would initiate there.
How would you guarantee that the planes, traveling
at 500mph would hit exactly there and not 10 stories
higher or lower? How would the explosives and
detonation means remain intact after the crash and
through the raging fires?
> Bush on video
> saying he saw the planes hit the buildings *before* those videos had
> been broadcast,
I don't have the time to waste to disprove this nonsense. But clearly
you think Bush was behind the whole thing. So, Bush put together
the most complex conspiracy in history, involving thousand of people,
God knows how many agencies, etc. Is this the same Bush that
could have thrown around some WMDs in Iraq to avoid total
embarrasement? That would have been child's play.
> broadcast reports of collapses before they actually
> happened,
yeah, so add the broadcast media to those who were in on the
conspiracy. That makes a lot of sense. And you think
intelligent people believe the media would have been
aware of it before hand.... Amazing. If such a media
report does exist, I'd love to see it and I'll bet it's one
of a reporter in the street, in the middle of all the confusion,
relaying something he'd heard, etc. In other words,
just more crap.
> no military interception of commercial airliners flying off
> course for hours, ad infinitum.
Lie # 4.
Let's look at one sequence of events. At 8:14AM on 911 AA11
from Boston failed to respond to a routine transmission from
ATC. At 8:20, ATC concluded the plane had likely been
hijacked. At 8:34 ATC first notified the Airforce. At 8:46, AA11
crashed into WTC 1. That's 32 minutes start to finish.
Sounds like a perfectly plausible sequence of events. And it's
32 minutes from the first indication of something wrong until
impact, which isn't flying off course for hours....
>
> But g'head, you just keep waving the american flag.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
No flag waving. Just the facts and respect for the dead and heros.
By your own theories many of the heros that day would have been
in on the largest, most impossibly complex conspiracy in history.
What flag are you waving?
== 7 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 9:44 am
From: "Bob F"
trader4@optonline.net wrote:
> On Mar 18, 10:02 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> DGDevin wrote
>>
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> DGDevin wrote
>>>>>>> So far? So far it is a cluster fuck. The situation is largely
>>>>>>> out of control. The complex is a total writeoff and will cost
>>>>>>> billions to clean up. And that is the best case.
>>>>>> And that affects you exactly how? Did they ask you to pay for
>>>>>> the clean up?
>>>>> Who do you think is paying for the U.S. military's efforts to
>>>>> offer aid in Japan if not the American taxpayer?
>>>> Thats peanuts as part of the US budget.
>>> So is taxpayer support for public broadcasting, and yet the
>>> Republicans in Congress figure its essential to end it as part of
>>> saving the budget.
>>
>> Your problem.
>
> Last time I checked, the US assistance to Japan is focused on the
> direct
> effects of the earthquake and tsuanmi, which are far greater than any
> effect the nuclear accident has had. Of course some would like to
> make
> it sound like the nuclear part is the worst part, but anyone paying
> attention
> to the news would know that we have 10,000+ dead from the direct
> effects of the earthquake and tsunami. So far, what's the nuclear
> death
> toll? Zero.
>
>
>
>>
>>>>> U.S. auto plants are shutting down because they can't get parts
>>>>> from
>>>>> Japan, do you imagine that won't have a serious impact in the
>>>>> U.S.?
>>>> Corse it wont, they will just get them from china and korea etc
>>>> instead.
>>> Then why are plants closing if it's just a matter of ordering the
>>> parts from someone else?
>>
>> Because it takes a bit of time to organise a change of supplier like
>> that.
>
> Any plant closings due to parts shortages are attributable to the
> earthquake,
> not the nuclear power issue. Bottom line, they lost part of their
> generating
> capacity. Show us a credible study that says if the power came from
> other
> sources, say coal or even solar, that the power situation as of now
> would be
> radically different. Or do you believe solar panels on the roofs of
> collapsed
> buildings just keep on sending power through transmission towers that
> have toppled over.
>
>
>
>>
>>>>> Japan is America's most important ally in Asia, but for years to
>>>>> come they're going to be focused inward, rebuilding from this
>>>>> horrible disaster,
>>>> And that is likely to be good for their economy, because otherwise
>>>> their lost
>>>> decade could very well have ended up as a lost quarter century
>>>> instead.
>>> It's only a few years short of being that now, which is why the
>>> Japanese have largely changed the name to The Lost Years, it isn't
>>> over yet.
>>
>> Time will tell if this beings an end to it.
>
> It's quite amazing how some of the anti-nukes can drag all kinds of
> absurd
> side issues into the discussion, isn't it?
>
>
>>
>>>>> is that unlikely to effect U.S. foreign policy in that part of
>>>>> the world?
>>>> Yep. It wont have any effect on that.
>>> So all those efforts to sign up Asian nations to resist China's
>>> efforts to increasingly throw its weight around
>>
>> Pure fantasy.
>>
>>> won't be impacted by the most powerful economy in that group of
>>> nations being unable to participate?
>
> Pure fantasy X2. Another lame attempt to try to link all kinds of
> crap
> by the anti-nuke nuts.
>
>
>>
>> You aint established that Japan wont be able to
>> continue to do what it has already been doing.
>>
>>> Check the battery in your crystal ball.
>>
>> Dont have one.
>>
>>>>> While I agree that a rush to judgment should be avoided, it is
>>>>> hard
>>>>> to ignore that these particular reactors have caused trouble
>>>>> before.
>>>> And the terminal stupidity of building nukes that can melt down in
>>>> a very earthquake prone zone when there are nukes that cant melt
>>>> down like the Canadian CANDUs in spades.
>>> If AECL was a publically traded company I'd suspect you of holding
>>> a lot of stock.
>>
>> More fool you.
>>
>>>>> Warnings about the vulnerability of the design were first raised
>>>>> in the 1970s, and the reactors at this plant are already well past
>>>>> their intended design life yet they were kept in service because
>>>>> corporate profits were put ahead of public safety.
>>>> Nope, because there is nothing special about the intended life.
>>> If you ignore that the Mark I design had safety flaws addressed in
>>> later designs,
>>
>> All nukes and anything else that major have done too.
>>
>>> flaws which have been revealed as brutally real in the past week.
>>> But other than that, no big deal.
>>
>> Irrelevant to that silly shit of yours about corporate profits.
>
> And irrelevant to the accident as we know it so far. No one, other
> than the
> anti-nuke armchair experts, has said any design issues specific to
> these
> reactors were the cause of the accident. After a full investigation,
> it
> could very well turn out that the biggest issue was where the diesel
> generators were located and how they were protected. And I would
> not be surprised to see that reactors of other design were not
> built with similar short comings. But we won't know that until there
> is a full investigation, something some of us here obviously don't
> want to see happen because they already claim to know so much.
== 8 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 9:51 am
From: Harry K
On Mar 19, 7:16 am, "trad...@optonline.net" <trad...@optonline.net>
wrote:
> On Mar 19, 9:25 am, Smitty Two <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <318d7936-08cf-4752-8479-658290887...@r13g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > "trad...@optonline.net" <trad...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > > On Mar 18, 1:02 pm, Smitty Two <prestwh...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <f727d4fa-c428-41d6-9f42-63b09c38c...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > "trad...@optonline.net" <trad...@optonline.net> wrote:
> > > > > Yeah, no need for an investiagtion to figure out what happened
>
> > > > Wasn't needed for 9/11, so shouldn't be necessary for this. Just clean
> > > > up the debris and haul it off to the dump.
>
> > > Are you now claiming there was no investigation of 9/11? Sounds
> > > like you're a truther, which shows where you're coming from. Of
> > > course
> > > the real truth is investigators had full access to the building
> > > debris
> > > prior to it being hauled away. Some of it is still in their
> > > possession.
>
> > I've never made any secret of my contempt for the official 9/11 story.
> > Lots of crackpots in my camp, and a lot of non-crackpots too. Every
> > intelligent open-minded person knows that it was an inside job.
>
> No person believing in the inside job theory fits my definition of
> intelligent. Open minded to wild conspiracy theories, yes.
>
> > No plane
> > fragments found at the Pentagon,
>
> Lie #1. There is a photo widely available on the internet of a
> large piece of fuselage with the airline colors clearly visible.
> Plenty of other debris was recovered as well.
>
> Beyond the lie, comes the methods of the truthers. It would
> not matter what was or was not found, it would never be right.
> If there is debris, it's too big, too much, it was staged. If there
> is less visible debris, then there should have been more,
> hence no plane crashed.
>
> > no reason for building 7 to collapse,
>
> Lie #2
> no reason other than it was hit by large amounts of debris
> from the WTC collapse, suffered structural damage, and
> had fires raging for most of the day. Just because we
> don't have perfect answers for every detail doesn't equate
> to conspiracy.
>
> >< 1
> > and 2 came down as carbon copies of demo'd buildings,
>
> Lie #3.
>
> Here's a Youtube video of a whole series of buildings that
> were brought down by controlled demolition.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK50So-yYRU
>
> None of them
> are carbon copies of the WTC. They differ even among
> themselves. But almost all either start from the bottom
> of the building, or the center of the building, or the whole
> building collapse initiates at the same time. None
> starts exactly where a 767 entered the building and then
> cascades downward as a progressive, floor by floor
> collapse.
>
> As an intelligent person, tell us how one would place
> explosives in exactly the place that the 767's hit
> the building, so the collapse would initiate there.
> How would you guarantee that the planes, traveling
> at 500mph would hit exactly there and not 10 stories
> higher or lower? How would the explosives and
> detonation means remain intact after the crash and
> through the raging fires?
>
> > Bush on video
> > saying he saw the planes hit the buildings *before* those videos had
> > been broadcast,
>
> I don't have the time to waste to disprove this nonsense. But clearly
> you think Bush was behind the whole thing. So, Bush put together
> the most complex conspiracy in history, involving thousand of people,
> God knows how many agencies, etc. Is this the same Bush that
> could have thrown around some WMDs in Iraq to avoid total
> embarrasement? That would have been child's play.
>
> > broadcast reports of collapses before they actually
> > happened,
>
> yeah, so add the broadcast media to those who were in on the
> conspiracy. That makes a lot of sense. And you think
> intelligent people believe the media would have been
> aware of it before hand.... Amazing. If such a media
> report does exist, I'd love to see it and I'll bet it's one
> of a reporter in the street, in the middle of all the confusion,
> relaying something he'd heard, etc. In other words,
> just more crap.
>
> > no military interception of commercial airliners flying off
> > course for hours, ad infinitum.
>
> Lie # 4.
>
> Let's look at one sequence of events. At 8:14AM on 911 AA11
> from Boston failed to respond to a routine transmission from
> ATC. At 8:20, ATC concluded the plane had likely been
> hijacked. At 8:34 ATC first notified the Airforce. At 8:46, AA11
> crashed into WTC 1. That's 32 minutes start to finish.
>
> Sounds like a perfectly plausible sequence of events. And it's
> 32 minutes from the first indication of something wrong until
> impact, which isn't flying off course for hours....
>
>
>
> > But g'head, you just keep waving the american flag.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> No flag waving. Just the facts and respect for the dead and heros.
> By your own theories many of the heros that day would have been
> in on the largest, most impossibly complex conspiracy in history.
> What flag are you waving?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
About the only lie he _didn't_ use was "no plane hit the
towers"...another favorite of the kooktards.
Hasrry K
== 9 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 9:53 am
From: "Bob F"
trader4@optonline.net wrote:
> Last time I checked, the US assistance to Japan is focused on the
> direct
> effects of the earthquake and tsuanmi, which are far greater than any
> effect the nuclear accident has had. Of course some would like to
> make
> it sound like the nuclear part is the worst part, but anyone paying
> attention
> to the news would know that we have 10,000+ dead from the direct
> effects of the earthquake and tsunami. So far, what's the nuclear
> death
> toll? Zero.
I quickly found reports of at least 2 workers killed at the plant in an early
explosion.
That's 2 more than zero.
== 10 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 9:59 am
From: bob haller
On Mar 19, 12:53 pm, "Bob F" <bobnos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> trad...@optonline.net wrote:
> > Last time I checked, the US assistance to Japan is focused on the
> > direct
> > effects of the earthquake and tsuanmi, which are far greater than any
> > effect the nuclear accident has had. Of course some would like to
> > make
> > it sound like the nuclear part is the worst part, but anyone paying
> > attention
> > to the news would know that we have 10,000+ dead from the direct
> > effects of the earthquake and tsunami. So far, what's the nuclear
> > death
> > toll? Zero.
>
> I quickly found reports of at least 2 workers killed at the plant in an early
> explosion.
>
> That's 2 more than zero.
japan has told the US the cooling pools were fine, even after they had
no water.
Japan has tried to cover up the seriousness of the event, which slows
others including the US helping them
== 11 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 10:54 am
From: "HeyBub"
Smitty Two wrote:
>
> I've never made any secret of my contempt for the official 9/11 story.
> Lots of crackpots in my camp, and a lot of non-crackpots too. Every
> intelligent open-minded person knows that it was an inside job. No
> plane fragments found at the Pentagon, no reason for building 7 to
> collapse, 1 and 2 came down as carbon copies of demo'd buildings,
> Bush on video saying he saw the planes hit the buildings *before*
> those videos had been broadcast, broadcast reports of collapses
> before they actually happened, no military interception of commercial
> airliners flying off course for hours, ad infinitum.
>
> But g'head, you just keep waving the american flag.
Let's take the easiest.
There were several plane fragments found in the Pentagon. The rim of one of
the landing gears, the strut for the nose wheel, large chunks from various
bulkheads with AA's signature paint, one of the tires from the plane,
various engine parts, dozens of pieces of aircraft skin littering the
campus, and more. To say there were no plane fragments found is completely
non-credible. I suppose you could claim that the stuff outside blew off a
passing truck on its way to a metal recycler and the stuff inside the
building was the residue from various office decorations (though what even
an Air Force officer would be doing with a Rolls-Royce engine in his office
is about medium weird).
Aside from the fact than numerous pieces of a 757 were found inside the
Pentagon, if it was not a plane that hit the building, what does your theory
say regarding the present whereabouts of American Airlines flight 77 and its
84 souls on board?
The only plausible explanations are 1) It was whisked into the ether by
space aliens, or 2) Miraculously taken up to heaven by God and the angles
(much like Ezekiel).
== 12 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 11:02 am
From: Kurt Ullman
In article <-P-dnfCzzIhDcBnQnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
"HeyBub" <heybub@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> an Air Force officer would be doing with a Rolls-Royce engine in his office
> is about medium weird).
RR was trying to get part of the contract for engines for the Joint
Strike Fighter. So, that would explain that.
>
> The only plausible explanations are 1) It was whisked into the ether by
> space aliens, or 2) Miraculously taken up to heaven by God and the angles
> (much like Ezekiel).
You forgot shanghied to Area 51.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
---PJ O'Rourke
== 13 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 11:57 am
From: "Rod Speed"
trader4@optonline.net wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> DGDevin wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> DGDevin wrote
>>>>>>> So far? So far it is a cluster fuck. The situation is largely
>>>>>>> out of control. The complex is a total writeoff and will cost
>>>>>>> billions to clean up. And that is the best case.
>>>>>> And that affects you exactly how? Did they ask you to pay for the clean up?
>>>>> Who do you think is paying for the U.S. military's efforts
>>>>> to offer aid in Japan if not the American taxpayer?
>>>> Thats peanuts as part of the US budget.
>>> So is taxpayer support for public broadcasting, and yet the Republicans
>>> in Congress figure its essential to end it as part of saving the budget.
>> Your problem.
> Last time I checked, the US assistance to Japan is focused on the
> direct effects of the earthquake and tsuanmi, which are far greater
> than any effect the nuclear accident has had. Of course some
> would like to make it sound like the nuclear part is the worst part,
> but anyone paying attention to the news would know that we have
> 10,000+ dead from the direct effects of the earthquake and tsunami.
> So far, what's the nuclear death toll? Zero.
And even if it does end up being a few, thats a trivial part of what the tsunami did.
And even when the plant that was about to be decomissioned is
entombed in concrete, thats a trivial part of the cost of the tsunami too.
>>>>> U.S. auto plants are shutting down because they can't get parts from
>>>>> Japan, do you imagine that won't have a serious impact in the U.S.?
>>>> Corse it wont, they will just get them from china and korea etc instead.
>>> Then why are plants closing if it's just a matter of ordering the
>>> parts from someone else?
>> Because it takes a bit of time to organise a change of supplier like that.
> Any plant closings due to parts shortages are attributable to the
> earthquake, not the nuclear power issue.
Sure, he never said that it was the result of the nuclear issue.
His comment was clearly in response to why does he care ?
> Bottom line, they lost part of their generating capacity.
> Show us a credible study that says if the power came
> from other sources, say coal or even solar, that the
> power situation as of now would be radically different.
None of the coal fired power stations got anything like the Fukushima result.
> Or do you believe solar panels on the roofs of collapsed
> buildings just keep on sending power through transmission
> towers that have toppled over.
Having fun thrashing that straw man ?
>>>>> Japan is America's most important ally in Asia, but for years to
>>>>> come they're going to be focused inward, rebuilding from this
>>>>> horrible disaster,
>>>> And that is likely to be good for their economy, because otherwise their lost
>>>> decade could very well have ended up as a lost quarter century instead.
>>> It's only a few years short of being that now, which is why the Japanese
>>> have largely changed the name to The Lost Years, it isn't over yet.
>> Time will tell if this beings an end to it.
> It's quite amazing how some of the anti-nukes can drag
> all kinds of absurd side issues into the discussion, isn't it?
Nope, it doesnt amaze me at all, thats all they have ever done.
It wasnt that long ago that those ignorant clowns were claiming
that nuke power stations could go bang like nuke missiles do.
They actually are that pig ignorant.
>>>>> is that unlikely to effect U.S. foreign policy in that part of the world?
>>>> Yep. It wont have any effect on that.
>>> So all those efforts to sign up Asian nations to resist
>>> China's efforts to increasingly throw its weight around
>> Pure fantasy.
>>> won't be impacted by the most powerful economy
>>> in that group of nations being unable to participate?
> Pure fantasy X2. Another lame attempt to try
> to link all kinds of crap by the anti-nuke nuts.
And he carefully deleted from the quoting my point that the tsunami
may well have a significant effect on the capacity of Japan to buy
US govt securitys and that may have a significant effect on the US.
Might not too if china takes over quite a bit of what Japan currently does too.
>> You aint established that Japan wont be able to
>> continue to do what it has already been doing.
>>> Check the battery in your crystal ball.
>> Dont have one.
>>>>> While I agree that a rush to judgment should be avoided, it is hard
>>>>> to ignore that these particular reactors have caused trouble before.
>>>> And the terminal stupidity of building nukes that can melt down in
>>>> a very earthquake prone zone when there are nukes that cant melt
>>>> down like the Canadian CANDUs in spades.
>>> If AECL was a publically traded company I'd suspect you of holding a lot of stock.
>> More fool you.
>>>>> Warnings about the vulnerability of the design were first raised
>>>>> in the 1970s, and the reactors at this plant are already well past
>>>>> their intended design life yet they were kept in service because
>>>>> corporate profits were put ahead of public safety.
>>>> Nope, because there is nothing special about the intended life.
>>> If you ignore that the Mark I design had safety flaws addressed in later designs,
>> All nukes and anything else that major have done too.
>>> flaws which have been revealed as brutally real
>>> in the past week. But other than that, no big deal.
>> Irrelevant to that silly shit of yours about corporate profits.
> And irrelevant to the accident as we know it so far. No one,
> other than the anti-nuke armchair experts, has said any design
> issues specific to these reactors were the cause of the accident.
It looks very likely that the lack of mains power and the inadequacy
of the backup diesel powered pumps due to their location is the reason
that the reactors and spent rod ponds couldnt be adequately cooled tho.
> After a full investigation, it could very well turn out that the biggest issue was
> where the diesel generators were located and how they were protected.
Yes, but you dont really need a full investigation on that.
Even the most superficial documentation should show if they were used after the tsunami.
Something must have been to initially fill the reactors with sea water.
Its less clear why that wasnt feasible with the spent rod pond too.
Maybe it just got more damaged and exceeded the pumping capacity
of the emergency pumps or something.
> And I would not be surprised to see that reactors of
> other design were not built with similar short comings.
Sure.
> But we won't know that until there is a full investigation, something some of us here
> obviously don't want to see happen because they already claim to know so much.
I dont see that they dont want to see it, its more that they are very free to
proclaim that the problem is corporate profits without bothering about evidence.
Thats typical of fools like that.
== 14 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 2:24 pm
From: aemeijers
On 3/19/2011 12:44 PM, Bob F wrote:
> trader4@optonline.net wrote:
>> On Mar 18, 10:02 pm, "Rod Speed"<rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> DGDevin wrote
>>>
>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>> DGDevin wrote
(pointless 'is too- is not' drivel snipped)
Guys, that is Rod you are talking to. If you said the sky is blue, he
would argue the point. Just ignore him long enough, and he'll go hang
out in some other group awhile.
--
aem sends...
== 15 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 2:45 pm
From: "HeyBub"
Kurt Ullman wrote:
> In article <-P-dnfCzzIhDcBnQnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> "HeyBub" <heybub@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> an Air Force officer would be doing with a Rolls-Royce engine in his
>> office is about medium weird).
>
> RR was trying to get part of the contract for engines for the Joint
> Strike Fighter. So, that would explain that.
>
>>
>> The only plausible explanations are 1) It was whisked into the ether
>> by space aliens, or 2) Miraculously taken up to heaven by God and
>> the angles (much like Ezekiel).
>
> You forgot shanghied to Area 51.
[Slaps face] Dang, how could I overlook the obvious? I have several (ex)
in-laws who CAME from Area 51 !
== 16 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 2:46 pm
From: aemeijers
On 3/19/2011 2:02 PM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
> In article<-P-dnfCzzIhDcBnQnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> "HeyBub"<heybub@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> an Air Force officer would be doing with a Rolls-Royce engine in his office
>> is about medium weird).
>
> RR was trying to get part of the contract for engines for the Joint
> Strike Fighter. So, that would explain that.
>
>>
>> The only plausible explanations are 1) It was whisked into the ether by
>> space aliens, or 2) Miraculously taken up to heaven by God and the angles
>> (much like Ezekiel).
>
> You forgot shanghied to Area 51.
>
The black helicopter crowd that thinks the government is capable of
pulling off a vast conspiracy and keeping it secret for a decade, always
gives me a giggle. I've worked for the Feds for 30+ years, and on a good
day, they have trouble finding their ass with both hands. It isn't a big
monolith, it is a bunch of petty fiefdoms that spend most of their
energy (and your money) having turf battles with each other. Any op with
more than 3 players or one agency involved would have been leaked within
a week.
--
aem sends...
== 17 of 17 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 3:48 pm
From: The Real Bev
On 03/19/11 10:54, HeyBub wrote:
> Aside from the fact than numerous pieces of a 757 were found inside the
> Pentagon, if it was not a plane that hit the building, what does your theory
> say regarding the present whereabouts of American Airlines flight 77 and its
> 84 souls on board?
>
> The only plausible explanations are 1) It was whisked into the ether by
> space aliens, or 2) Miraculously taken up to heaven by God and the angles
> (much like Ezekiel).
You didn't watch 'Lost', did you?
--
Cheers, Bev
==================================================
Is the Pope Catholic? Do bears shit in the woods?
Did Rose Kennedy have a black dress?
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Outrageous (operator assisted) phone charges
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e2bf0b6ebd705505?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 3:33 am
From: Zee
On Mar 17, 7:25 pm, Bill Bowden <bper...@bowdenshobbycircuits.info>
wrote:
> Not having a long distance service, I recently made a 23 minute long
> distance call (California to Texas) using operator assistance and was
> billed a little over $60. The operator made no comment about the
> charges at the time. I consulted AT&T costumer service about a credit
> for being unaware of the high rates, but they said there was nothing
> they could do. I could have purchased a prepaid phone including 5
> hours of time for less than $40. But there was still nothing they
> could do.
>
> Live and learn, I guess.
>
> -Bill
Yeah Live and Learn but $60 poorer I guess :)
Try Onesuite.com next time, you can use it as a phone card from a
regular phone or as a VoIP service from your computer. Cheap rates
both ways.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Can you have sex with an angel?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3b65919b70429c58?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 7:43 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit
Campaign"
Assume you are walking down the street and find this beautiful angel --
wings tucked in under the dress-- and she tells you, "Hi, I'm an angel
and if you want to have sex with me, it'll cost you 100 bucks."
Is that something someone can object to?
NOTE: This is not a hypothetical question, but rather I'm trying to
find out who's behind the practice of planting undercover
prostitutes.* Same undercover agents we can use to ride a bike and
catch bad drivers. This is a crime with victims.
* HINT: Christian morality
--------------------------------------------------
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 10:32 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit
Campaign"
Yesterday I saw two real angels indeed: One was this girl --no older
than 14-- riding peacefully her Electra bike alone, taking the lane as
needed as if cars could not hurt her --she surely was immortal. The
other angel was an evil angel, like Lucifer himself, driving his SUV
recklessly and roaring his motor for all to surrender to his path of
death.
But I know Jesus will come soon and set up speed cameras.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bad Housekeeper needs tips.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/070aed9aa5fbdc1e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 10:06 am
From: "Bob F"
Lou wrote:
> It's hard to beat
> ammonia, but use that only if you have good ventilation. NEVER mix
> ammonia with a chlorine-containing product, the combination can give
> off mustard gas with possibly fatal results.
The combination gives off chlorine gas, not mustard gas.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 5:03 pm
From: "Lou"
"Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:im2nr3$19q$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> Lou wrote:
> > It's hard to beat
> > ammonia, but use that only if you have good ventilation. NEVER mix
> > ammonia with a chlorine-containing product, the combination can give
> > off mustard gas with possibly fatal results.
>
> The combination gives off chlorine gas, not mustard gas.
>
Beats me. I found a few sites on the web that say the combination produces
mustard gas, sites that say it produces chlorine gas, sites that say it does
not produce mustard or chlorine gas but does produce chloramine gas.
Whatever the result, they all say the combination can be deadly.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Damn Pedestrians!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a4486f5ab89c33d5?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 12:52 pm
From: Sofa Slug
On 3/16/2011 2:40 AM, Harry Brogan wrote:
> Next time you get that errant pedestrian the can't ((or is ignoring))
> the bell you are ringing try this...
>
> http://www.deltacycle.com/Airzound-Bike-Horn
>
> THAT will probably get their attention.
I love this line from one of the Airzound reviews on that site:
"The model 2 is literally on par with the quality of Happy Meal toys."
==============================================================================
TOPIC: If every roof was a solar panel
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/dd0a5af9cc4337f6?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Mar 19 2011 3:44 pm
From: The Real Bev
On 03/18/11 19:41, Nick Naim wrote:
> "Karen Silkwood"<georgeswk@toast.net> wrote in message
> news:georgeswk-0419F7.18574518032011@news.toast.net...
>> We wouldn't need nuke power plants or Wars for Oil.
>> Wouldn't that be a better world? New research could make the panels
>> cheap. They could heat water or air, even make electricity.
>> and Karen would still be with us.
>> --
>> Karma, What a concept!
> Wars would be for still
Why has nobody mentioned the outgassing problem?
--
Cheers, Bev
=====================================================
Election 2012:
There's never been a better time to vote libertarian.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
