Ariana Grande concert suicide bomber attack Manchester UK

[felix]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html

"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured in a
suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night after an Ariana
Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England, authorities said."

This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even support
for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP with their
policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl smugglers!
shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic terrorists is
to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that we are not safe
anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political parties that have
zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic terrorist attack in
Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one because of their strict
immigration policies, and conditions on Islamic practices.

http://allfourestates.com/why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/

https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

[Petzl]

Post by felix
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html
"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured in a
suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night after an Ariana
Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England, authorities said."
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even support
for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP with their
policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl smugglers!
shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic terrorists is
to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that we are not safe
anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political parties that have
zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic terrorist attack in
Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one because of their strict
immigration policies, and conditions on Islamic practices.
http://allfourestates.com/why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

"WE" need to identify an enemy!
This video shows how it is done.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/aqgooajl94nprxl/Miltary.mp4?dl=0

This Trojan horse invasion by Moslems was invented by Mohammad when he
and his marauding followers fled Mecca in AD 622 to Yathrib now called
Medina. Claiming "refugee status" Medina welcomed them as "our"
government does today!

ISIS is doing nothing that the Moslem's "Prophet" Mohammad wouldn't
do!
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/05/the_greatest_murder_machine_in_history.html

Mohammad himself was once a (claimed) refugee taken in by the Jewish
city of Medina (fleeing Mecca 622).

Within five years, Mohammad (joining with other invading "marauding
refugees") had driven out, executed, or enslaved every Jew living in
Medina before the rise of Islam, Medina Was Originally A Jewish City..
https://www.britannica.com/place/Medina-Saudi-Arabia

Medina was more Jewish than Islamic. Talented Jews built Medina [then
called Yathrib] and made it one of the most prosperous areas in the
Arabian peninsula.

Two polytheist Arab tribes settled alongside with the Jews, who
maintained a strong presence there until Muhammad and some of his
followers killed, enslaved, robbed and/or expelled Jews.
Medina then fell under Islamic backwardness and the Saudi regime is in
the forefront in promoting the Jihad against infidels

For around 1,400 years Islam has produced the major majority of the
worlds "refugees"! Always fleeing from what they created!
Still the same today!

Time to address the fact the problem is Islam.

Always Moslems blame their murder sprees on everyone but themselves!
Like Schizophrenics, they need therapy. Not confirmation of their
delusions and as refugees made leave their delusions where they
created them.

Islam is not a religion, it is a vile, violent political process.

Moslems and Islam are of course synonymous with terror!
It was and is a CRIME to allow Moslems in. Every politician is
obligated to know the history of foreign people they bring in. If they
had done even a little bit of study they would have found a
bloodthirsty people, full of hate and terrorism.?

Mohammad invented this sort of invasion by stealth, Centuries old
still used today.
A good book about this attack by stealth is
https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Day-Trojan-Horse-Immigration/dp/0979492955

or buy video here
HIJRAH - RADICAL(FUNDAMENTAL) ISLAM'S GLOBAL INVASION
http://paulnehlen.com/hijrah-movie/

[Ördög]

Petzl declared

Post by felix
"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured in a
suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night after an Ariana
Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England, authorities said."

Regurgitated idiotic propaganda brain-farts....

I'll bet you and Felix are getting pure orgasms about this latest
terrorist attack.

I'll also bet that two you could not really give a damn about the dead
and the injured.

The main thing is the resulting spreading of more Islamophobic fear and
more hate.
So you've new propaganda ammunition for your holy Crusade towards the
total extermination of all Muslims World wide, no matter what this would
cost the human race.

You are a fake Xtian and a fake human Petz!

[Trevor]

Post by felix
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even
support for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP
with their policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl
smugglers! shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic
terrorists is to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that
we are not safe anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political
parties that have zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic
terrorist attack in Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one
because of their strict immigration policies, and conditions on
Islamic practices.

They did cause a few deaths of other nationals, including many
Australians, during WW2 of course. :-(
Sad some think the only answer to hate is more hate and more wars. :-(

You could have said North Korea instead though, perhaps you'd like to
live there? I doubt we'll miss you if you go. I'd rather not emulate
them here though.

Trevor.

[felix]

Post by Trevor

Post by felix
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even
support for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP
with their policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl
smugglers! shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic
terrorists is to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that
we are not safe anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political
parties that have zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic
terrorist attack in Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one
because of their strict immigration policies, and conditions on
Islamic practices.

They did cause a few deaths of other nationals, including many
Australians, during WW2 of course. :-(

we're not talking about the past but the present situation. please try
to keep up..

Post by Trevor
Sad some think the only answer to hate is more hate and more wars. :-(

yeah, typical leftist wanker attitude. any call for action is hate
mongering, islamophobia, racism, etc.,

Post by Trevor
You could have said North Korea instead though, perhaps you'd like to
live there? I doubt we'll miss you if you go.

after you dickhead..

Post by Trevor
I'd rather not emulate them here though.
Trevor.

[Trevor]

Post by felix

Post by Trevor

Post by felix
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even
support for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP
with their policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl
smugglers! shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic
terrorists is to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that
we are not safe anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political
parties that have zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic
terrorist attack in Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one
because of their strict immigration policies, and conditions on
Islamic practices.

They did cause a few deaths of other nationals, including many
Australians, during WW2 of course. :-(

we're not talking about the past but the present situation. please try
to keep up..

YOU don't get to decide what others are allowed to write, even IF you
choose to ignore history for the sake of you own argument!

Post by felix

Post by Trevor
Sad some think the only answer to hate is more hate and more wars. :-(

yeah, typical leftist wanker attitude. any call for action is hate
mongering, islamophobia, racism, etc.,

Typical Fascist wanker attitude where hate mongering and war are
considered good for business.

Post by felix

Post by Trevor
You could have said North Korea instead though, perhaps you'd like to
live there? I doubt we'll miss you if you go.

after you dickhead..

NOT me who is the whinging fascist dickhead! Their dictatorship would
obviously suit YOU far better than me!

Trevor.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Trevor

Post by felix
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even
support for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP
with their policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl
smugglers! shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic
terrorists is to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that
we are not safe anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political
parties that have zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic
terrorist attack in Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one
because of their strict immigration policies, and conditions on
Islamic practices.

They did cause a few deaths of other nationals, including many
Australians, during WW2 of course. :-(

Irrekevant.

Post by Trevor
Sad some think the only answer to hate is more hate and more wars. :-(

Where and how does Japsanese immigration policy indicate "hate and
more wars"?

Post by Trevor
You could have said North Korea instead though,

Or South Korea, or China, or Fiji, or Argentina ...

Post by Trevor
perhaps you'd like to live there?

Where? Nicaragua?

Post by Trevor
I doubt we'll miss you if you go.

Who is this "we", white boi?

Post by Trevor
I'd rather not emulate them here though.

Yair, sure. Much better to encourage potential child murderers than
maintain the integrity of our native culture.

Get a clue, moron.

[felix]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by felix
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even
support for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP
with their policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl
smugglers! shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic
terrorists is to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that
we are not safe anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political
parties that have zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic
terrorist attack in Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one
because of their strict immigration policies, and conditions on
Islamic practices.

They did cause a few deaths of other nationals, including many
Australians, during WW2 of course. :-(

Irrekevant.

Post by Trevor
Sad some think the only answer to hate is more hate and more wars. :-(

Where and how does Japsanese immigration policy indicate "hate and
more wars"?

lefties brains are scrambled. they're not interested in facts or
anything that actually works!

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
You could have said North Korea instead though,

Or South Korea, or China, or Fiji, or Argentina ...

Post by Trevor
perhaps you'd like to live there?

Where? Nicaragua?

Post by Trevor
I doubt we'll miss you if you go.

Who is this "we", white boi?

Post by Trevor
I'd rather not emulate them here though.

Yair, sure. Much better to encourage potential child murderers than
maintain the integrity of our native culture.
Get a clue, moron.

that'll be the day..

[Trevor]

Post by felix
lefties brains are scrambled. they're not interested in facts or
anything that actually works!

So at least "lefties" have brains then, Fascists don't have ANY, and
wouldn't know FACT from fiction, so call them "alternative facts"
instead. And their moronic supporters lap it up!:-(

Trevor.

[andy memory]

Post by Ned Latham
Where and how

Why are you posting as:

Ned Latham
Bill Flett
Brett Cahill
Gunner Asch
Preston Hamblin
Jeffrey Van Rensselaer
Frank Tomasczewski

etc. etc. etc....


Here's some data on YOU little man Ball:


11 years ago, while posting under this current nym, Rudy Canoza, we had a
discussion about a revised marketing claim concerning grass-fed beef from
USDA. You claimed that you had written to and received a reply from
William T.
Sessions, Associate Deputy Administrator, Livestock and Seed Program. Here
below is the post you wrote using the nym Rudy Canoza containing your
correspondence with William Sessions.

[start- Jon to me]
Eat shit and bark at the moon, Dreck - the proposed
standard has NOT been adopted. I wrote to William
Sessions, the associate deputy administrator (how's
that for a title) at the Livestock and Seed Program at
USDA that is in charge of writing the standard for the
"meat marketing claims"; his name, title and e-mail
address are at a web page whose URL I gave yesterday,
http://www.fass.org/fasstrack/news_item.asp?news_id=1152

Here's his reply:

From: "Sessions, William" <***@usda.gov>
To: <jonball@[...]>
Mr. Ball: Thanks for your message. The marketing claim
standards are still under review by USDA. Accordingly, the
standards have not been published in a final form for use. I
hope this information is helpful.
Please let me know if further information is needed.
Thanks,
William T. Sessions
Associate Deputy Administrator
Livestock and Seed Program

-----Original Message-----
From: jonball@[...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 11:38 AM
To: Sessions, William
Subject: 2003 proposed standards for meat marketing claims

I have read about the proposed standards, and I've seen
many of the public comments sent to USDA. I cannot find
anything to indicate if the standards were adopted.
Were the standards as proposed in 2003 adopted?

Thanks in advance.
Jonathan Ball
Pasadena, CA
___________________________________________________
Jonathan Ball aka Rudy Canoza 08 Sep 2005 http://bit.ly/2cYknsh
[end]

Jonathan Ball. Pasadena, CA. Priceless! That email, posted from Jonathan
Ball,
you, and the return email sent to Jonathan Ball proves beyond all doubt that
you are Jonathan Ball. Of course, you don't live in Pasadena since moving to
5327 Shepard Ave Sacramento, CA 95819-1731

Here's the proof Jonathan D Ball http://bit.ly/1LFy9t8

Post by Ned Latham
and I won't die soon.

Yeah you will. You're an old man who hasn't looked after himself. I wouldn't
go around goading people if I was as small and as puny as you are, liar Jon.
You ought to be very careful.

Post by Ned Latham
You certainly have no means to hasten my death.

Are you really serious, weed? you're just over 5 feet tall and 64 years old.
You'll be 65 on December 2nd. You've got to stop threatening people and
goading them to come after you. You're pathetic.

[Ned Latham]

Post by andy memory

Post by Ned Latham
Crap, They're pushing the delusion that Islam can be "controlled"
and its bigotry and violence contained.

Ned Latham

'Coz it's my name, you moron.

Post by andy memory
Bill Flett
Brett Cahill
Gunner Asch
Preston Hamblin
Jeffrey Van Rensselaer
Frank Tomasczewski
etc. etc. etc....

I'm not, you bumbling fuckwit.

----remaining delusional crap snipped----

What majes you think that posting a bucketfull of bullshit will cover
up the fact that youi're an incompetent bozo who can't argue against
the facts I've used against your cretinous drivel?

[Trevor]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by felix
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even
support for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP
with their policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl
smugglers! shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic
terrorists is to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that
we are not safe anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political
parties that have zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic
terrorist attack in Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one
because of their strict immigration policies, and conditions on
Islamic practices.

They did cause a few deaths of other nationals, including many
Australians, during WW2 of course. :-(

Irrekevant.

To you naturally, those who ignore history like to maintain their ignorance!

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
Sad some think the only answer to hate is more hate and more wars. :-(

Where and how does Japsanese immigration policy indicate "hate and
more wars" >> You could have said North Korea instead though,
Or South Korea, or China, or Fiji, or Argentina ...

Post by Trevor
perhaps you'd like to live there?

Where? Nicaragua?

Post by Trevor
I doubt we'll miss you if you go.

Who is this "we", white boi?

Post by Trevor
I'd rather not emulate them here though.

Yair, sure. Much better to encourage potential child murderers than
maintain the integrity of our native culture.
Get a clue, moron.

Well I'd be happier with many immigrants than idiots like YOU whose
answer to everyone who doesn't agree with them is to simply call them a
moron. That pretty much sums *your* reasoning ability up since I'd
actually prefer we had ZERO immigration (no political, cultural, or
religious bias necessary!), unlike BOTH parties who have run immigration
at 200,000 to 300,000 for decades :-(

Trevor.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by felix
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even
support for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP
with their policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl
smugglers! shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic
terrorists is to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that
we are not safe anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political
parties that have zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic
terrorist attack in Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one
because of their strict immigration policies, and conditions on
Islamic practices.

They did cause a few deaths of other nationals, including many
Australians, during WW2 of course. :-(

Irrekevant.

To you naturally,

Wrong again, moron. It's in fact very relevant to me personally, but
utterly IRrelebant to the matter at hand, which is the correlation
between Japan's immigration policy and Japan's freedom from Islamoc
terrorism.

Post by Trevor
those who ignore history like to maintain their ignorance!

You're doing quite well at that. Is your mummy proud of her little
defect?

----snip----

Post by Trevor
idiots like YOU

No they don't. As you demonstrated quite well in this post.

[Trevor]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
those who ignore history like to maintain their ignorance!

You're doing quite well at that. Is your mummy proud of her little
defect?

As usual for morons, nothing but ad hominem attacks when you have
nothing else. You'll need to look that up of course.

Trevor.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by felix
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al
want for Australia apparently with their liberal attitude
towards, even support for, muslims and Islamic ideology,
and not to mention the ALP with their policies that would
see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl smugglers! shame
on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic
terrorists is to make us fearful in our own countries-
fearful that we are not safe anywhere at anytime. we must
support ONLY political parties that have zero tolerance
to Islam! when was the last Islamic terrorist attack in
Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one because
of their strict immigration policies, and conditions on
Islamic practices.

They did cause a few deaths of other nationals, including
many Australians, during WW2 of course. :-(

Irrekevant.

To you naturally,

Wrong again, moron. It's in fact very relevant to me personally,

You have nothing to say about that, you mendacious maggot?

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
but utterly IRrelevant to the matter at hand, which is the
correlation between Japan's immigration policy and Japan's
freedom from Islamoc terrorism.

You have nothing to say about that, you mendacious maggot?

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
those who ignore history like to maintain their ignorance!

You're doing quite well at that. Is your mummy proud of her little
defect?

As usual for morons, nothing but ad hominem attacks when you have
nothing else.

Wrong again, liar. You also employed dishonesty.

Post by Trevor
You'll need to look that up of course.

Wrong again, moron. I've known the meaning of "moron" since *long*
before you showed up.

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
idiots like YOU

No they don't. As you demonstrated quite well in this post.

And again. Do you really think that dishonesty is the best policy?

[Gordon Levi]

Post by felix
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html
"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured in a
suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night after an Ariana
Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England, authorities said."
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even support
for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP with their
policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl smugglers!
shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic terrorists is
to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that we are not safe
anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political parties that have
zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic terrorist attack in
Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one because of their strict
immigration policies, and conditions on Islamic practices.
http://allfourestates.com/why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

France and the U.K. were obliged to accept many Muslim immigrants from
their former colonies of Algeria and Pakistan respectively. They made
no attempt to integrate them and treated them as second class citizens
from the day they arrived. Australia has an excellent record for
integrating new arrivals and if it were not for those fearful of
Muslims and the exploitation of that fear by politicians the tiny
number of terrorist attacks in Australia could be reduced even
further.

I believe that those posters you list only want to contradict your
more hysterical fears in order to maintain Australia's fair treatment
of immigrants. Neither I nor they disagree with your claim that Muslim
terrorists are dangerous lunatics.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by felix
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/
serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-
during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html
"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured in a
suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night after an Ariana
Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England, authorities said."
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even support
for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP with their
policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl smugglers!
shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic terrorists is
to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that we are not safe
anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political parties that have
zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic terrorist attack in
Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one because of their strict
immigration policies, and conditions on Islamic practices.
http://allfourestates.com/
why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/
zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-
need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

France and the U.K. were obliged to accept many Muslim immigrants from
their former colonies of Algeria and Pakistan respectively. They made
no attempt to integrate them and treated them as second class citizens
from the day they arrived. Australia has an excellent record for
integrating new arrivals

Not since the multy-culty madness and its so-called "tolerance" were
imposed on us.

Post by Gordon Levi
and if it were not for those fearful of Muslims

Crap. You Islamist apologists should stop projecting your own fears
onto the world's realists.

Post by Gordon Levi
and the exploitation of that fear by politicians

Crap. On this issue, the politicians and the apologists are engaged in
coverup, not fear-mongering.

Post by Gordon Levi
the tiny
number of terrorist attacks in Australia could be reduced even
further.

Crap. What keeps the number down is the restrictions of the implements
of terrorism.

Post by Gordon Levi
I believe that those posters you list only want to contradict your
more hysterical fears in order to maintain Australia's fair treatment
of immigrants.

Crap, They're pushing the delusion that Islam can be "controlled" and
its bigotry and violence contained.

Post by Gordon Levi
Neither I nor they disagree with your claim that Muslim
terrorists are dangerous lunatics.

Your and their "interpretations" of statements criticising those selfsame
dangerous lunatics and their supporters says otherwise.

[felix]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by felix
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/
serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-
during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html
"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured in a
suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night after an Ariana
Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England, authorities said."
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even support
for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP with their
policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl smugglers!
shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic terrorists is
to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that we are not safe
anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political parties that have
zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic terrorist attack in
Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one because of their strict
immigration policies, and conditions on Islamic practices.
http://allfourestates.com/
why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/
zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-
need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

France and the U.K. were obliged to accept many Muslim immigrants from
their former colonies of Algeria and Pakistan respectively. They made
no attempt to integrate them and treated them as second class citizens
from the day they arrived. Australia has an excellent record for
integrating new arrivals

Not since the multy-culty madness and its so-called "tolerance" were
imposed on us.

Post by Gordon Levi
and if it were not for those fearful of Muslims

Crap. You Islamist apologists should stop projecting your own fears
onto the world's realists.

Post by Gordon Levi
and the exploitation of that fear by politicians

Crap. On this issue, the politicians and the apologists are engaged in
coverup, not fear-mongering.

Post by Gordon Levi
the tiny
number of terrorist attacks in Australia could be reduced even
further.

Crap. What keeps the number down is the restrictions of the implements
of terrorism.

Post by Gordon Levi
I believe that those posters you list only want to contradict your
more hysterical fears in order to maintain Australia's fair treatment
of immigrants.

Crap, They're pushing the delusion that Islam can be "controlled" and
its bigotry and violence contained.

exactly!

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
Neither I nor they disagree with your claim that Muslim
terrorists are dangerous lunatics.

Your and their "interpretations" of statements criticising those selfsame
dangerous lunatics and their supporters says otherwise.

indeed

[Gordon Levi]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by felix
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/
serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-
during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html
"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured in a
suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night after an Ariana
Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England, authorities said."
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even support
for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP with their
policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl smugglers!
shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic terrorists is
to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that we are not safe
anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political parties that have
zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic terrorist attack in
Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one because of their strict
immigration policies, and conditions on Islamic practices.
http://allfourestates.com/
why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/
zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-
need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

France and the U.K. were obliged to accept many Muslim immigrants from
their former colonies of Algeria and Pakistan respectively. They made
no attempt to integrate them and treated them as second class citizens
from the day they arrived. Australia has an excellent record for
integrating new arrivals

Not since the multy-culty madness and its so-called "tolerance" were
imposed on us.

The Department of Social Security defines multiculturalism here
<http://tinyurl.com/nzuv5a9>. What do you object to? Multiculturalism
has always been at the core of Australian values. We started trying to
treat English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh people equally. We expanded
that to include most Europeans. Then we went on to include Asians and
even aborigines . At what point did you object.

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
and if it were not for those fearful of Muslims

Crap. You Islamist apologists should stop projecting your own fears
onto the world's realists.

I said you were fearful of Muslims. Everything you write about them
expresses that fear and I don't see why you wish to deny that you are
afraid.

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
and the exploitation of that fear by politicians

Crap. On this issue, the politicians and the apologists are engaged in
coverup, not fear-mongering.

Minister Dutton exploits that fear with every policy announcement and
every lie he tells about asylum seekers. Pauline Hanson has been
exploiting that fear. She started with anti-Chinese and
anti-aboriginal rhetoric and now has jumped on the bandwagon and
substituted anti-Muslim rhetoric.

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
the tiny
number of terrorist attacks in Australia could be reduced even
further.

Crap. What keeps the number down is the restrictions of the implements
of terrorism.

A truck or car is a common implement. The Internet will explain how to
make a pipe bomb with everyday components that you probably have at
home. I agree that we are fortunate in that the worst semi-automatic
guns are prohibited.

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
I believe that those posters you list only want to contradict your
more hysterical fears in order to maintain Australia's fair treatment
of immigrants.

Crap, They're pushing the delusion that Islam can be "controlled" and
its bigotry and violence contained.

Post by Gordon Levi
Neither I nor they disagree with your claim that Muslim
terrorists are dangerous lunatics.

Your and their "interpretations" of statements criticising those selfsame
dangerous lunatics and their supporters says otherwise.

The argument is about who is deluded. Is it the people who are so
terrified of Muslims that they wish to deport them and/or prohibit
their entry or is it the people who think that Muslims span the same
spectrum as other religious nutters.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by felix
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/
serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-
during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html
"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured
in a suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night
after an Ariana Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England,
authorities said."
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even
support for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention
the ALP with their
policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl
smugglers! shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of
Islamic terrorists is to make us fearful in our own
countries- fearful that we are not safe anywhere at anytime.
we must support ONLY political parties that have zero
tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic terrorist
attack in Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been
one because of their strict immigration policies, and
conditions on Islamic practices.
http://allfourestates.com/
why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/
zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-
need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

France and the U.K. were obliged to accept many Muslim immigrants
from their former colonies of Algeria and Pakistan respectively.
They made no attempt to integrate them and treated them as second
class citizens from the day they arrived. Australia has an
excellent record for integrating new arrivals

Not since the multy-culty madness and its so-called "tolerance" were
imposed on us.

The Department of Social Security defines multiculturalism here
<http://tinyurl.com/nzuv5a9>.

They've been tinkering with the definition of "multiculturalism" for
decades. What they call it now is not what they called it 20 years
ago, and is not what it *was* 20 years ago. Ditto 40 years. and 30
teasr, and 10 years. Fuxck their hypocritical weaselling.

Post by Gordon Levi
What do you object to?

Lies, hypocrisy, oppressive social engineering programmes...

Post by Gordon Levi
Multiculturalism has always been at the core of Australian values.

That's a lie. This country is, and always was, multucultured. not
milticulturalist.

Post by Gordon Levi
We started trying to treat English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh
people equally. We expanded that to include most Europeans.
Then we went on to include Asians and even aborigines.
At what point did you object.

At the point where they demanded that we, who in the nineteenth
century made what is arguably the most significant cultural advance
in millennia, should abandon our culture in favour of "respecting"
and "tolerating" the lunatic cultures that people were bringing
here and recreating in imitation of the hellholes they'd fled from.

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
and if it were not for those fearful of Muslims

Crap. You Islamist apologists should stop projecting your own fears
onto the world's realists.

I said you were fearful of Muslims.

And I have repeatedluy rehected that lie.

Post by Gordon Levi
Everything you write about them expresses that fear

That's a lie. It expresses contempt.

Post by Gordon Levi
and I don't see why you wish to deny that you are afraid.

It's a lie.

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
and the exploitation of that fear by politicians

Crap. On this issue, the politicians and the apologists are engaged in
coverup, not fear-mongering.

Minister Dutton exploits that fear with every policy announcement and
every lie he tells about asylum seekers.

You, a liar, call him a liar? Let's see something you think might pass
as evidence of that, maggot.

Post by Gordon Levi
Pauline Hanson has been
exploiting that fear. She started with anti-Chinese and anti-aboriginal
rhetoric and now has jumped on the bandwagon and substituted anti-Muslim
rhetoric.

Get your idiot hand off it. Listen to what SHE saus, not what politicians
and media whores say *about* her.

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
the tiny
number of terrorist attacks in Australia could be reduced even
further.

Crap. What keeps the number down is the restrictions of the implements
of terrorism.

A truck or car is a common implement.

Such have been used bby terrorists, what... three times?

Post by Gordon Levi
The Internet will explain how to
make a pipe bomb with everyday components that you probably have at
home.

And if one *does* have them (particularly the oxidant) at home, one
is also on the terrorist watch list. At least for a while.

Post by Gordon Levi
I agree that we are fortunate in that the worst semi-automatic
guns are prohibited.

Gunpowder, too. And the more effective precursor chemicals too. And
even inefficient ones are under surveillance.

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
I believe that those posters you list only want to contradict your
more hysterical fears in order to maintain Australia's fair treatment
of immigrants.

Crap, They're pushing the delusion that Islam can be "controlled" and
its bigotry and violence contained.

Post by Gordon Levi
Neither I nor they disagree with your claim that Muslim
terrorists are dangerous lunatics.

Your and their "interpretations" of statements criticising those selfsame
dangerous lunatics and their supporters says otherwise.

The argument is about who is deluded.

Irrelevant to the point, which is your mendavious treatment of criticisms
of those lunatics and of policiesa favouring them.

Post by Gordon Levi
Is it the people who are so
terrified of Muslims that they wish to deport them and/or prohibit
their entry

Case in point. There are rational reasons for keeping them out.

Post by Gordon Levi
or is it the people who think that Muslims span the
same spectrum as other religious nutters.

There, at last, you say something approximating my attitude.

[Gordon Levi]

[snip]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
I said you were fearful of Muslims.

And I have repeatedluy rehected that lie.

Post by Gordon Levi
Everything you write about them expresses that fear

That's a lie. It expresses contempt.

Nonsense. Nobody argues in favour of keeping contemptible people out
of the country. That argument is driven by fear and that is true even
if the fear is rational.

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
and I don't see why you wish to deny that you are afraid.

It's a lie.

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
and the exploitation of that fear by politicians

Crap. On this issue, the politicians and the apologists are engaged in
coverup, not fear-mongering.

Minister Dutton exploits that fear with every policy announcement and
every lie he tells about asylum seekers.

You, a liar, call him a liar? Let's see something you think might pass
as evidence of that, maggot.

He lied about the shootings on Manus Island
<http://tinyurl.com/lue94ls>. The same article refers to his lie about
asylum seekers being led to the detention despite being directly
contradicted by the PNG Police Commissioner.

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
Pauline Hanson has been
exploiting that fear. She started with anti-Chinese and anti-aboriginal
rhetoric and now has jumped on the bandwagon and substituted anti-Muslim
rhetoric.

Get your idiot hand off it. Listen to what SHE saus, not what politicians
and media whores say *about* her.

Here's what she says <http://tinyurl.com/hxtapxq>. There is a link on
the page to her 1996 anti-Asian speech.
[snip]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
Is it the people who are so
terrified of Muslims that they wish to deport them and/or prohibit
their entry

Case in point. There are rational reasons for keeping them out.

[snip]

[Ned Latham]

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
Everything you write about them expresses that fear

That's a lie. It expresses contempt.

Nonsense.

So now you know me better than I knowe mysaelf?

Post by Gordon Levi
Nobody argues in favour of keeping0 contemptible people out
of the country.

Really? We *want* the neighbourhood degraded?

Post by Gordon Levi
That argument is driven by fear and that is true even if
the fear is rational.

Try to get this into your head, cretin: "dislike", "distaste",
"detestation", "contempt", and so on are *not* synonyms of "fear".

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
Minister Dutton exploits that fear with every policy announcement
and every lie he tells about asylum seekers.

You, a liar, call him a liar? Let's see something you think might pass
as evidence of that, maggot.

He lied about the shootings on Manus Island <http://tinyurl.com/lue94ls>.

There's nothing in that article indicating any lie on his part.

And stop putting URLs in angle brackets, they don't belong there.

Post by Gordon Levi
The same article refers to his lie about asylum seekers being led to
the detention despite being directly contradicted by the PNG Police
Commissioner.

There is nothing there about asylum seekers "being led to the detention"
centre. There is something about a local boy being led there, but that's
not attribuyed to Button. There is also something about (unattributed)
allegations of "sexual" assault, and some contradiction by the PNG
Police Commossioner, but again, nothing about Button.

Are you really that uncomprehending? Or is this apparent incomptrhrmdion
a settled technique of yours for goading people into making mistakes?

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
Pauline Hanson has been
exploiting that fear. She started with anti-Chinese and anti-aboriginal
rhetoric and now has jumped on the bandwagon and substituted anti-Muslim
rhetoric.

Get your idiot hand off it. Listen to what SHE saus, not what politicians
and media whores say *about* her.

Here's what she says <http://tinyurl.com/hxtapxq>. There is a link on
the page to her 1996 anti-Asian speech.

So what's in there that justifies your "exploiting" fears? What she said
about those lunatics is accurate. Even the lying rodent has criticised
her detractors on that one.

[Gordon Levi]

Ned Latham <***@woden.valhalla.oz> wrote:

[OT]

Post by Ned Latham
And stop putting URLs in angle brackets, they don't belong there.

From Sir Timothy himself - "In addition, there are many occasions when
URLs are included in other kinds of text; examples include electronic
mail, USENET news messages, or printed on paper. In such cases, it is
convenient to have a separate syntactic wrapper that delimits the URL
and separates it from the rest of the text, and in particular from
punctuation marks that might be mistaken for part of the URL. For this
purpose, is recommended that angle brackets ("<" and ">"), along with
the prefix "URL:", be used to delimit the boundaries of the URL."

<https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt>.

[Ned Latham]

< >

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
And stop putting URLs in angle brackets, they don't belong there.

From Sir Timothy himself - "In addition, there are many occasions when
URLs are included in other kinds of text; examples include electronic
mail, USENET news messages, or printed on paper. In such cases, it is
convenient to have a separate syntactic wrapper that delimits the URL
and separates it from the rest of the text, and in particular from
punctuation marks that might be mistaken for part of the URL. For this
purpose, is recommended that angle brackets ("<" and ">"), along with
the prefix "URL:", be used to delimit the boundaries of the URL."
<https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt>.

The angle brackets and the prefic "URL"" are redundent. Just naming the
protocol distinguishes a URL from plain text. The RFC you referenced
is accessible at https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt. That form also
distifuishes it from Usenet message-ids, which *do* require the angle
brackets for theur delimitation.

I note that you are not using his recommended form, so why appeal to
his "authority"?

[Gordon Levi]

Post by Ned Latham
< >

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
And stop putting URLs in angle brackets, they don't belong there.

From Sir Timothy himself - "In addition, there are many occasions when
URLs are included in other kinds of text; examples include electronic
mail, USENET news messages, or printed on paper. In such cases, it is
convenient to have a separate syntactic wrapper that delimits the URL
and separates it from the rest of the text, and in particular from
punctuation marks that might be mistaken for part of the URL. For this
purpose, is recommended that angle brackets ("<" and ">"), along with
the prefix "URL:", be used to delimit the boundaries of the URL."
<https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt>.

The angle brackets and the prefic "URL"" are redundent. Just naming the
protocol distinguishes a URL from plain text.

The RFC tells you exactly why the angle brackets are desirable.

Post by Ned Latham
The RFC you referenced
is accessible at https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt.

That's an amazing piece of research! Did you copy it from the URL I
gave you above?

Post by Ned Latham
That form also
distifuishes it from Usenet message-ids, which *do* require the angle
brackets for theur delimitation.
I note that you are not using his recommended form, so why appeal to
his "authority"?

Because of the reasons stated in the RFC. It also prevents some news
and email clients wrapping the URL. I don't expect you to do anything
you didn't learn in primary school but you might reconsider "they
don't belong there". You can leave them out and I'll continue to use
them. OK?

[Ned Latham]

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
< >

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
And stop putting URLs in angle brackets, they don't belong there.

From Sir Timothy himself - "In addition, there are many occasions when
URLs are included in other kinds of text; examples include electronic
mail, USENET news messages, or printed on paper. In such cases, it is
convenient to have a separate syntactic wrapper that delimits the URL
and separates it from the rest of the text, and in particular from
punctuation marks that might be mistaken for part of the URL. For this
purpose, is recommended that angle brackets ("<" and ">"), along with
the prefix "URL:", be used to delimit the boundaries of the URL."
<https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt>.

The angle brackets and the prefic "URL"" are redundent. Just naming the
protocol distinguishes a URL from plain text.

The RFC tells you exactly why the angle brackets are desirable.

And it never occurred to you that the RFC might be a tad out of daye?

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
The RFC you referenced
is accessible at https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt.

That's an amazing piece of research!

Wrong again, moron. It's a demonstration that the angle brackets and
the prefix are redundent.

Post by Gordon Levi
Did you copy it from the URL I gave you above?

Now why would I do the simple thing when I could hunt around via
google for however long?

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
That form also distinguishes it from Usenet message-ids, which
*do* require the angle brackets for theur delimitation.
I note that you are not using his recommended form, so why appeal
to his "authority"?

Because of the reasons stated in the RFC.

You are NOT following the RFC's recommendations. Your appeal to its
"authority" is hypocritical at best.

Post by Gordon Levi
It also prevents some news and email clients wrapping the URL.

And some it doesn't, because they can handle wrapped URLs.

Post by Gordon Levi
I don't expect you to do anything you didn't learn in primary school

That's the reason you keep judging me by yourself, right?

Post by Gordon Levi
but you might reconsider "they don't belong there".

Nope. Usenet has moved on since that RFC was finalised.

Post by Gordon Levi
You can leave them out and I'll continue to use them. OK?

No. But knowing your mulish mentality, I don't ecxpect you
to risk doing something sensible.

[Corba Mite]

Post by Ned Latham
You are NOT following the RFC's recommendations.

Fuck the rfc.

...and fuck you too.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Corba Mite

Post by Ned Latham
You are NOT following the RFC's recommendations.

Fuck the rfc.

Betcha can't.

Post by Corba Mite
...and fuck you too.

Not a chance. I *know* you're not a human woman.

[Del Gue]

I *know* I'm not a human woman.

Ok then.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Del Gue

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Corba Mite

Post by Ned Latham
You are NOT following the RFC's recommendations.

Fuck the rfc.

Betcha can't.

Post by Corba Mite
...and fuck you too.

Not a chance. I *know* you're not a human woman.

Ok then.

You might have some luck in Rhode Island...

[Del Gue]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Del Gue

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Corba Mite

Post by Ned Latham
You are NOT following the RFC's recommendations.

Fuck the rfc.

Betcha can't.

Post by Corba Mite
...and fuck you too.

Not a chance. I *know* you're not a human woman.

Ok then.

You might have some luck in Rhode Island...

You get these:

Loading Image...

[Ned Latham]

Post by Del Gue

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Del Gue

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Corba Mite

Post by Ned Latham
You are NOT following the RFC's recommendations.

Fuck the rfc.

Betcha can't.

Post by Corba Mite
...and fuck you too.

Not a chance. I *know* you're not a human woman.

Ok then.

You might have some luck in Rhode Island...

I don't get them at all. I just never understood why people are
fascinated by defects.

Post by Del Gue
https://mozo.com.au/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/troll.jpg

You're even uglier than your mother/sister.

[Gordon Levi]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
< >

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
And stop putting URLs in angle brackets, they don't belong there.

From Sir Timothy himself - "In addition, there are many occasions when
URLs are included in other kinds of text; examples include electronic
mail, USENET news messages, or printed on paper. In such cases, it is
convenient to have a separate syntactic wrapper that delimits the URL
and separates it from the rest of the text, and in particular from
punctuation marks that might be mistaken for part of the URL. For this
purpose, is recommended that angle brackets ("<" and ">"), along with
the prefix "URL:", be used to delimit the boundaries of the URL."
<https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt>.

The angle brackets and the prefic "URL"" are redundent. Just naming the
protocol distinguishes a URL from plain text.

The RFC tells you exactly why the angle brackets are desirable.

And it never occurred to you that the RFC might be a tad out of daye?

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
The RFC you referenced
is accessible at https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt.

That's an amazing piece of research!

Wrong again, moron. It's a demonstration that the angle brackets and
the prefix are redundent.

Compare <http://google.com/ncr/> and <http://google.com/ncr>. The
angle bracket would protect the second one if it was immediately
followed by a forward slash.

[felix]

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
< >

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
And stop putting URLs in angle brackets, they don't belong there.

From Sir Timothy himself - "In addition, there are many occasions when
URLs are included in other kinds of text; examples include electronic
mail, USENET news messages, or printed on paper. In such cases, it is
convenient to have a separate syntactic wrapper that delimits the URL
and separates it from the rest of the text, and in particular from
punctuation marks that might be mistaken for part of the URL. For this
purpose, is recommended that angle brackets ("<" and ">"), along with
the prefix "URL:", be used to delimit the boundaries of the URL."
<https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt>.

The angle brackets and the prefic "URL"" are redundent. Just naming the
protocol distinguishes a URL from plain text.

The RFC tells you exactly why the angle brackets are desirable.

And it never occurred to you that the RFC might be a tad out of daye?

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
The RFC you referenced
is accessible at https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt.

That's an amazing piece of research!

Wrong again, moron. It's a demonstration that the angle brackets and
the prefix are redundent.

Compare <http://google.com/ncr/> and <http://google.com/ncr>. The
angle bracket would protect the second one if it was immediately
followed by a forward slash.

I've always used angle brackets because I read that they prevent the url
being broken up by text wrap; which of course causes it to not function
as a url

[Gordon Levi]

Post by felix

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
< >

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
And stop putting URLs in angle brackets, they don't belong there.

From Sir Timothy himself - "In addition, there are many occasions when
URLs are included in other kinds of text; examples include electronic
mail, USENET news messages, or printed on paper. In such cases, it is
convenient to have a separate syntactic wrapper that delimits the URL
and separates it from the rest of the text, and in particular from
punctuation marks that might be mistaken for part of the URL. For this
purpose, is recommended that angle brackets ("<" and ">"), along with
the prefix "URL:", be used to delimit the boundaries of the URL."
<https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt>.

The angle brackets and the prefic "URL"" are redundent. Just naming the
protocol distinguishes a URL from plain text.

The RFC tells you exactly why the angle brackets are desirable.

And it never occurred to you that the RFC might be a tad out of daye?

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
The RFC you referenced
is accessible at https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1738.txt.

That's an amazing piece of research!

Wrong again, moron. It's a demonstration that the angle brackets and
the prefix are redundent.

Compare <http://google.com/ncr/> and <http://google.com/ncr>. The
angle bracket would protect the second one if it was immediately
followed by a forward slash.

I've always used angle brackets because I read that they prevent the url
being broken up by text wrap; which of course causes it to not function
as a url

Yes. That's another reason for the angle brackets although some news
and email clients wrap the URL despite the angle brackets and
identifying it as a URL.

Given that Ned is usually correct about everything it is surprising
that he would actually oppose sticking to the standard.

[Ned Latham]

----snip----

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by felix
I've always used angle brackets because I read that they prevent
the url being broken up by text wrap; which of course causes it
to not function as a url

Except that sime news clients wrap long lines whatever they conrain,
and (starngelt) can habfle wrapped URLs.

Post by Gordon Levi
Yes. That's another reason for the angle brackets although some
and email clients wrap the URL despite the angle brackets and
news identifying it as a URL.

Mmm. And you've never stopped to have a think anout that, have you/

Post by Gordon Levi
Given that Ned is usually correct about everything

"Usually". You're improving.

Post by Gordon Levi
it is surprising that he would actually oppose sticking to the
standard.

Tha standard you're defending was released in 1984, dimwit. Usenet
has moved on since then.

[Gordon Levi]

Post by Ned Latham
----snip----

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by felix
I've always used angle brackets because I read that they prevent
the url being broken up by text wrap; which of course causes it
to not function as a url

Except that sime news clients wrap long lines whatever they conrain,
and (starngelt) can habfle wrapped URLs.

Post by Gordon Levi
Yes. That's another reason for the angle brackets although some
and email clients wrap the URL despite the angle brackets and
news identifying it as a URL.

Mmm. And you've never stopped to have a think anout that, have you/

Not again! If you have something to say spell it out. There is no
point in asking Socratic questions in a news group.

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
Given that Ned is usually correct about everything

"Usually". You're improving.

Post by Gordon Levi
it is surprising that he would actually oppose sticking to the
standard.

Tha standard you're defending was released in 1984,

This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that they
misunderstood in primary school.

Post by Ned Latham
dimwit. Usenet has moved on since then.

Has there been an update to RFC1738?

[Ned Latham]

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
----snip----

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by felix
I've always used angle brackets because I read that they prevent
the url being broken up by text wrap; which of course causes it
to not function as a url

Except that sime news clients wrap long lines whatever they conrain,
and (starngelt) can habfle wrapped URLs.

Post by Gordon Levi
Yes. That's another reason for the angle brackets although some
and email clients wrap the URL despite the angle brackets and
news identifying it as a URL.

Mmm. And you've never stopped to have a think anout that, have you/

Not again! If you have something to say spell it out. There is no
point in asking Socratic questions in a news group.

It's not a socratic question, you dimwit; it's a criticism of your
mental laziness.

"Some email clients wrap the URL despite the angle brackets and news
identifying it as a URL", because (a) that renders them readable in
a standard console, and (b) they can havdle wrapped URLs. IOW, and
as I've said to you before, the angle brackets are redundent.

And because some email clients also distinguish undentation levels
to assist the reader in relating each part of the message to its
author, the left angle bracket at the beginning can disturb the
clarity of the display.

IOW, the angle brackets are not just redundent, superfluous,
innecessary; they're detrimental to efficient communication.

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
Given that Ned is usually correct about everything

"Usually". You're improving.

Post by Gordon Levi
it is surprising that he would actually oppose sticking to the
standard.

Tha standard you're defending was released in 1984,

This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that they
misunderstood in primary school.

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish. Or you pretend to. One can never
be sure with congenital liars.

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
dimwit. Usenet has moved on since then.

Has there been an update to RFC1738?

I neither know nor care. Usenet has moved on. EOS.

[Trevor]

Ned Latham <***@woden.valhalla.oz> wrote:> Gordon Levi, 83% Moron,
wrote:>> This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they>> misunderstood in primary school

Post by Ned Latham
Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.

:-)

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Ned Latham
Except that sime news clients wrap long lines whatever they conrain,
and (starngelt) can habfle wrapped URLs.

:-)

[Ned Latham]

Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that some news clients wrap long lines whatever they contain,
and (strangely!) can handle wrapped URLs.

Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a wowwy
Twevor?

[Trevor]

Post by Ned Latham
Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that sime news clients wrap long lines whatever they conrain,
and (starngelt) can habfle wrapped URLs.

Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a wowwy
Twevor?

So the person who can't write one sentence without a million typo's has
nothing to add other than a personal attack on someone who CAN actually
write English. No real surprise there!

Trevor.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that some news clients wrap long lines whatever they contain,
and (strangely!) can handle wrapped URLs.
Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a
wowwy Twevor?

So the person who can't write one sentence without a million typo's

That's "typoes" moron.

Post by Trevor
has nothing to add other than a personal attack on someone who CAN
`actually write English.

You "think" you can. FYI, moron, there is NO word in the English
language where the plural is spelt with an apostrophe.

You need remedial assistance in English AND arithmetic.

Post by Trevor
No real surprise there!

You attack me, I fight. Get used to it, moron.

[Trevor]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that some news clients wrap long lines whatever they contain,
and (strangely!) can handle wrapped URLs.
Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a
wowwy Twevor?

So the person who can't write one sentence without a million typo's

That's "typoes" moron.

Ah the irony, the FAR more accepted practice is simply Typos. This is
what a Google search has to say :

"This is, somewhat ironically, a tricky word to spell correctly. Many
words that end in o take an e — potatoes, tomatoes. NOT in this case.

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
has nothing to add other than a personal attack on someone who CAN
`actually write English.

You "think" you can. FYI, moron, there is NO word in the English
language where the plural is spelt with an apostrophe.

And yet you get it even MORE incorrect!!! :-) :-)

Post by Ned Latham
You need remedial assistance in English AND arithmetic.

So NO hope for you at all then!!!

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
No real surprise there!

You attack me, I fight. Get used to it, moron.

YOU attacked me. I gave it back. Fuck off into your corner.

Trevor.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that some news clients wrap long lines whatever they contain,
and (strangely!) can handle wrapped URLs.
Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a
wowwy Twevor?

So the person who can't write one sentence without a million typo's

That's "typoes" moron.

Ah the irony, the FAR more accepted practice is simply Typos.

I af\gree that subliyeracy is rife these days. Something to do
with the abandonment of education ib favour of baby-sitting,
ego stroking and indocrination.

Post by Trevor
"This is, somewhat ironically, a tricky word to spell correctly. Many
words that end in o take an e? potatoes, tomatoes. NOT in this case.

They're wrong. Your "authority" is septic. They've been getting
English wrong for centuries. They *still* haven't worked out
the difference bewteen "metre" and "meter".

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
has nothing to add other than a personal attack on someone who CAN
`actually write English.

You "think" you can. FYI, moron, there is NO word in the English
language where the plural is spelt with an apostrophe.

And yet you get it even MORE incorrect!!! :-) :-)

Wrong again, moron. Even if "typoes" were incorrect there no way
it could be more incorrect than a spelling that doesn't make sense..

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
You need remedial assistance in English AND arithmetic.

So NO hope for you at all then!!!

Of giving you said assistance? Don't even dream about it maggot.
You're a lioar; I despose liars.

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
No real surprise there!

You attack me, I fight. Get used to it, moron.

YOU attacked me. I gave it back. Fuck off into your corner.

You sneered at felix, So *I* gave it back.

Fuck off yourself, maggot.

[FMurtz]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that some news clients wrap long lines whatever they contain,
and (strangely!) can handle wrapped URLs.
Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a
wowwy Twevor?

So the person who can't write one sentence without a million typo's

That's "typoes" moron.

Ah the irony, the FAR more accepted practice is simply Typos.

I af\gree that subliyeracy is rife these days. Something to do
with the abandonment of education ib favour of baby-sitting,
ego stroking and indocrination.

Post by Trevor
"This is, somewhat ironically, a tricky word to spell correctly. Many
words that end in o take an e? potatoes, tomatoes. NOT in this case.

They're wrong. Your "authority" is septic. They've been getting
English wrong for centuries. They *still* haven't worked out
the difference bewteen "metre" and "meter".

and solder pronounced soder.

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
has nothing to add other than a personal attack on someone who CAN
`actually write English.

You "think" you can. FYI, moron, there is NO word in the English
language where the plural is spelt with an apostrophe.

And yet you get it even MORE incorrect!!! :-) :-)

Wrong again, moron. Even if "typoes" were incorrect there no way
it could be more incorrect than a spelling that doesn't make sense..

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
You need remedial assistance in English AND arithmetic.

So NO hope for you at all then!!!

Of giving you said assistance? Don't even dream about it maggot.
You're a lioar; I despose liars.

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor
No real surprise there!

You attack me, I fight. Get used to it, moron.

YOU attacked me. I gave it back. Fuck off into your corner.

You sneered at felix, So *I* gave it back.
Fuck off yourself, maggot.

[Fran]

Post by FMurtz

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that some news clients wrap long lines whatever they contain,
and (strangely!) can handle wrapped URLs.
Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a
wowwy Twevor?

So the person who can't write one sentence without a million typo's

That's "typoes" moron.

Ah the irony, the FAR more accepted practice is simply Typos.

I af\gree that subliyeracy is rife these days. Something to do
with the abandonment of education ib favour of baby-sitting,
ego stroking and indocrination.

Post by Trevor
"This is, somewhat ironically, a tricky word to spell correctly. Many
words that end in o take an e? potatoes, tomatoes. NOT in this case.

They're wrong. Your "authority" is septic. They've been getting
English wrong for centuries. They *still* haven't worked out
the difference bewteen "metre" and "meter".

and solder pronounced soder.

Do wake up Murtz and follow the thread. Pronunciation has little to do
with spelling.

Fucked in the head Ned was yet again banging on about his indefensible
spelling of "typos" and not how typos is pronounced. His attempt to
deflect attention by pretending that yanks don't know the difference
between metre/meter has nothing to do with pronunciation.

Any yank will know if they are reading a meter or measuring a meter.
Similarly they will know that if they are using solder, it makes not a
hill of beans difference to what they are doing even if they call solder
by the name of Bethany, Cheryl or even Craig.

[Ranger Reid]

The ugky sow, aka the mad cowm posting as "Fran"

Post by Fran

Post by FMurtz

Post by Trevor

Post by Trevor

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that some news clients wrap long lines whatever
they contain, and (strangely!) can handle wrapped URLs.
Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a
wowwy Twevor?

So the person who can't write one sentence without a million

typo's
That's "typoes" moron.

Ah the irony, the FAR more accepted practice is simply Typos.

I af\gree that subliteracy is rife these days. Something to do
with the abandonment of education ib favour of baby-sitting,
ego stroking and indocrination.

Post by Trevor
"This is, somewhat ironically, a tricky word to spell correctly. Many
words that end in o take an e? potatoes, tomatoes. NOT in this case.

They're wrong. Your "authority" is septic. They've been getting
English wrong for centuries. They *still* haven't worked out
the difference bewteen "metre" and "meter".

and solder pronounced soder.

Do wake up Murtz and follow the thread.

Practise what you preach, you mad killfile Kow.

Post by Fran
Pronunciation has little to do with spelling.

Irrelevant, Piggy. And wrong.

Post by Fran
Fucked in the head Ned

Quit projecting, Piggy.

Post by Fran
was yet again banging on about his indefensible
spelling of

Your incomprehebsion is not a measure of defensibility, Piggy.

Post by Fran
"typos"

That's "typoes",moron.

Post by Fran
and not how typos

That's "typoes" moron.

Post by Fran
is pronounced.

I said nothing avout pronunciation, Piggy. That was FMurtz, He was
just showing another side of the septics' suboptimal comprehension
of English.

And guess what, Piggy? It's all still there, quoted above.

Do at least *try* to keep up, you moron.

Post by Fran
His attempt to
deflect attention

Wrong again, Piggy. That's you, putting up a straw man.

Post by Fran
by pretending that yanks don't know the difference
between metre/meter

It's not a pretence, Piggy. They spell both words the same way:
"meter".

Post by Fran
has nothing to do with pronunciation.

So why are you banging on about it, Piggy? You think you'be got
a straw man by the tail?

Post by Fran
Any yank will know if they are reading a meter or measuring a meter.

Irrelevamt. Piggy. It's about spelling.

Oh, and BTW, Piggy: that's "metre", you moron.

----remaining cretinism snipped----

[Red Pepper]

Ranger Reid (aka Mad Ned Latham, the mentally constipated troll) was

Post by Ranger Reid
The ugk
cowm
malignancy
Emglish.
Pore
widdwe
typoes.
oo
wowwy
typoes
Kow.
incomprehebsion
typoes
typoes
avout
you'be
Irrelevamt
----remaining cretinism snipped----

Indeed.
I have kept the better parts and removed the rest of Mad Ned's
pathetic embarrassment above.
And that feels so goooooood!

[Fran]

Post by Ranger Reid
The ugky sow, aka the mad cowm posting as "Fran"

Nym shifting Nutty Ned still can't figure out how to use his spell
checker.......

[FMurtz]

Post by Fran

Post by FMurtz

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that some news clients wrap long lines whatever they contain,
and (strangely!) can handle wrapped URLs.
Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a
wowwy Twevor?

So the person who can't write one sentence without a million typo's

That's "typoes" moron.

Ah the irony, the FAR more accepted practice is simply Typos.

I af\gree that subliyeracy is rife these days. Something to do
with the abandonment of education ib favour of baby-sitting,
ego stroking and indocrination.

Post by Trevor
"This is, somewhat ironically, a tricky word to spell correctly. Many
words that end in o take an e? potatoes, tomatoes. NOT in this case.

They're wrong. Your "authority" is septic. They've been getting
English wrong for centuries. They *still* haven't worked out
the difference bewteen "metre" and "meter".

and solder pronounced soder.

Do wake up Murtz and follow the thread. Pronunciation has little to do
with spelling.

Don't care, getting bored ,and I think it is funny every time I hear it.
And the topic is suicide bombing not the spelling of Ned .

Post by Fran
Fucked in the head Ned was yet again banging on about his indefensible
spelling of "typos" and not how typos is pronounced. His attempt to
deflect attention by pretending that yanks don't know the difference
between metre/meter has nothing to do with pronunciation.
Any yank will know if they are reading a meter or measuring a meter.
Similarly they will know that if they are using solder, it makes not a
hill of beans difference to what they are doing even if they call solder
by the name of Bethany, Cheryl or even Craig.

[Fran]

Post by FMurtz

Post by Fran

Post by FMurtz

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Trevor

Post by Ned Latham
Some dimwit calling itself "Trevor" perpetrated a complete
cockup, so idiotically and unreqadablt ugly that I decided
to repair it before responding. If you wantt tp see it, look

Post by Gordon Levi
This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they> misunderstood in primary school

Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.
Except that some news clients wrap long lines whatever they contain,
and (strangely!) can handle wrapped URLs.
Aw. Pore widdwe Twevor can't handwe a few typoes. Does oo wann a
wowwy Twevor?

So the person who can't write one sentence without a million typo's

That's "typoes" moron.

Ah the irony, the FAR more accepted practice is simply Typos.

I af\gree that subliyeracy is rife these days. Something to do
with the abandonment of education ib favour of baby-sitting,
ego stroking and indocrination.

Post by Trevor
"This is, somewhat ironically, a tricky word to spell correctly. Many
words that end in o take an e? potatoes, tomatoes. NOT in this case.

They're wrong. Your "authority" is septic. They've been getting
English wrong for centuries. They *still* haven't worked out
the difference bewteen "metre" and "meter".

and solder pronounced soder.

Do wake up Murtz and follow the thread. Pronunciation has little to do
with spelling.

Don't care, getting bored

Yeah, fair enough. I am too at the lack of posts worth reading.

,and I think it is funny every time I hear it.

Post by FMurtz
And the topic is suicide bombing not the spelling of Ned .

The thread started out as suicide bombing. Not not one thing in the
post you replied to related to suicide bombing. It had morphed into
Nutty Ned's failure to be able to spell.

[Gordon Levi]

Post by Trevor
wrote:>> This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they>> misunderstood in primary school

Post by Ned Latham
Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.

:-)

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Ned Latham
Except that sime news clients wrap long lines whatever they conrain,
and (starngelt) can habfle wrapped URLs.

I managed except for "starngelt". I though it might be a German
currency so I used Google to look it up and Google said "Did you mean
strangely?". It would be easier if Ned was capable of using a spell
checker instead of making each of his eager readers do it for
themselves.

[Ned Latham]

Gordon Levi, 93% Moron, wrote:

----snip----

Post by Gordon Levi
would be easier if Ned was capable of using a spell
checker instead of making each of his eager readers
do it for themselves.

You've been told why I don't, weasel, which mean that you know
full well that your implication of incapability is false. IOW,
you lied.

Oh, gee. Wot a sirpise.

[Gordon Levi]

Post by Ned Latham
----snip----

Post by Gordon Levi
would be easier if Ned was capable of using a spell
checker instead of making each of his eager readers
do it for themselves.

You've been told why I don't, weasel, which mean that you know
full well that your implication of incapability is false. IOW,
you lied.

As I recall you claimed that using a spell checker was either beyond
you or you would need to proof read the post anyway and you were too
lazy to do so. I responded by saying that the communication you value
so highly would be made easier even if the spell checker substituted
incorrect words. If you can use a spell checker why don't give it a
try?

Post by Ned Latham
Oh, gee. Wot a sirpise.

[Ned Latham]

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
----snip----

Post by Gordon Levi
would be easier if Ned was capable of using a spell
checker instead of making each of his eager readers
do it for themselves.

You've been told why I don't, weasel, which mean that you know
full well that your implication of incapability is false. IOW,
you lied.

As I recall

As yoiu recall? Are you incapable of checking what you've read?

Post by Gordon Levi
you claimed that using a spell checker was either beyond you

I bever said anything like that, liar.

Post by Gordon Levi
or you would need to proof read the post anyway

There you go.

Post by Gordon Levi
and you were too lazy to do so.

That too is a lie. Obe thing I *have* said is "If I were concerned
about how posts appear to you, I'd proofread with a lot more care
than I do, but the fact is, my attitude to Usenet articles has
changed since you ignorant maggots started imposing your ignorance,
mendacity and malice on it.

Messaage <***@woden.valhalla.oz>, if you're
interested.

----ifiot question snipped----

[Gordon Levi]

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
----snip----

Post by Gordon Levi
would be easier if Ned was capable of using a spell
checker instead of making each of his eager readers
do it for themselves.

You've been told why I don't, weasel, which mean that you know
full well that your implication of incapability is false. IOW,
you lied.

As I recall

As yoiu recall? Are you incapable of checking what you've read?

Post by Gordon Levi
you claimed that using a spell checker was either beyond you

I bever said anything like that, liar.

Post by Gordon Levi
or you would need to proof read the post anyway

There you go.

Post by Gordon Levi
and you were too lazy to do so.

That too is a lie. Obe thing I *have* said is "If I were concerned
about how posts appear to you, I'd proofread with a lot more care
than I do, but the fact is, my attitude to Usenet articles has
changed since you ignorant maggots started imposing your ignorance,
mendacity and malice on it.

I decided it was laziness rather than deliberate obfuscation because
you have preached the virtues of clear communication and have
corrected the spelling and grammar of other posters.

Post by Ned Latham
interested.
----ifiot question snipped----

[Ned Latham]

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Ned Latham
----snip----

Post by Gordon Levi
would be easier if Ned was capable of using a spell
checker instead of making each of his eager readers
do it for themselves.

You've been told why I don't, weasel, which mean that you know
full well that your implication of incapability is false. IOW,
you lied.

As I recall

As yoiu recall? Are you incapable of checking what you've read?

Post by Gordon Levi
you claimed that using a spell checker was either beyond you

I bever said anything like that, liar.

Post by Gordon Levi
or you would need to proof read the post anyway

There you go.

Post by Gordon Levi
and you were too lazy to do so.

That too is a lie. Obe thing I *have* said is "If I were concerned
about how posts appear to you, I'd proofread with a lot more care
than I do, but the fact is, my attitude to Usenet articles has
changed since you ignorant maggots started imposing your ignorance,
mendacity and malice on it.

I decided it was laziness

Your statement above is to the effect that I claimed to be lazy, you
lying maggot.

Your "decision" in the matter is nothing more than the posturing of
an arrogant idiot.

----snip----

[Trevor]

Post by Gordon Levi

Post by Trevor
wrote:>> This from someone who is still using a spelling rule that
they>> misunderstood in primary school

Post by Ned Latham
Wrong. You misunderstand Emglish.

:-)

Post by Ned Latham

Post by Ned Latham
Except that sime news clients wrap long lines whatever they conrain,
and (starngelt) can habfle wrapped URLs.

I managed except for "starngelt". I though it might be a German
currency so I used Google to look it up and Google said "Did you mean
strangely?". It would be easier if Ned was capable of using a spell
checker

Ned and capable don't belong in the same sentence.

Post by Gordon Levi
instead of making each of his eager readers do it for
themselves.

"Eager", yea right! :-)

Trevor.

[andy memory]

Post by Ned Latham
Crap, They're pushing the delusion

Why are you posting as:

Ned Latham
Bill Flett
Brett Cahill
Gunner Asch
Preston Hamblin
Jeffrey Van Rensselaer
Frank Tomasczewski

etc. etc. etc....


Here's some data on YOU little man Ball:


11 years ago, while posting under this current nym, Rudy Canoza, we had a
discussion about a revised marketing claim concerning grass-fed beef from
USDA. You claimed that you had written to and received a reply from
William T.
Sessions, Associate Deputy Administrator, Livestock and Seed Program. Here
below is the post you wrote using the nym Rudy Canoza containing your
correspondence with William Sessions.

[start- Jon to me]
Eat shit and bark at the moon, Dreck - the proposed
standard has NOT been adopted. I wrote to William
Sessions, the associate deputy administrator (how's
that for a title) at the Livestock and Seed Program at
USDA that is in charge of writing the standard for the
"meat marketing claims"; his name, title and e-mail
address are at a web page whose URL I gave yesterday,
http://www.fass.org/fasstrack/news_item.asp?news_id=1152

Here's his reply:

From: "Sessions, William" <***@usda.gov>
To: <jonball@[...]>
Mr. Ball: Thanks for your message. The marketing claim
standards are still under review by USDA. Accordingly, the
standards have not been published in a final form for use. I
hope this information is helpful.
Please let me know if further information is needed.
Thanks,
William T. Sessions
Associate Deputy Administrator
Livestock and Seed Program

-----Original Message-----
From: jonball@[...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 11:38 AM
To: Sessions, William
Subject: 2003 proposed standards for meat marketing claims

I have read about the proposed standards, and I've seen
many of the public comments sent to USDA. I cannot find
anything to indicate if the standards were adopted.
Were the standards as proposed in 2003 adopted?

Thanks in advance.
Jonathan Ball
Pasadena, CA
___________________________________________________
Jonathan Ball aka Rudy Canoza 08 Sep 2005 http://bit.ly/2cYknsh
[end]

Jonathan Ball. Pasadena, CA. Priceless! That email, posted from Jonathan
Ball,
you, and the return email sent to Jonathan Ball proves beyond all doubt that
you are Jonathan Ball. Of course, you don't live in Pasadena since moving to
5327 Shepard Ave Sacramento, CA 95819-1731

Here's the proof Jonathan D Ball http://bit.ly/1LFy9t8

Post by Ned Latham
and I won't die soon.

Yeah you will. You're an old man who hasn't looked after himself. I wouldn't
go around goading people if I was as small and as puny as you are, liar Jon.
You ought to be very careful.

Post by Ned Latham
You certainly have no means to hasten my death.

Are you really serious, weed? you're just over 5 feet tall and 64 years old.
You'll be 65 on December 2nd. You've got to stop threatening people and
goading them to come after you. You're pathetic.

[Ned Latham]

Post by andy memory

Post by Ned Latham
Crap, They're pushing the delusion that Islam can be "controlled"
and its bigotry and violence contained.

Ned Latham

'Coz it's my name, you moron.

Post by andy memory
Bill Flett
Brett Cahill
Gunner Asch
Preston Hamblin
Jeffrey Van Rensselaer
Frank Tomasczewski
etc. etc. etc....

I'm not, you bumbling fuckwit.

----remaining delusional crap snipped----

What majes you think that posting a bucketfull of bullshit will cover
up the fact that youi're an incompetent bozo who can't argue against
the facts I've used against your cretinous drivel?

[b2016]

Post by felix
http://allfourestates.com/why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-

immigration/

Post by felix
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/zero-islamic-

terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

These links argue that the reason why there have been no Islamic
terrorist attacks in Tokyo is because there are no Muslims in Tokyo.

Hard to argue with, isn't it?

Why is it that leftists, atheists and globalists insist that Muslim
immigration into the West including Australia is something that must
happen? Don't we have the right to say no?

[Ned Latham]

Post by b2016

Post by felix
http://allfourestates.com/
why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/
zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-
need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

These links argue that the reason why there have been no Islamic
terrorist attacks in Tokyo is because there are no Muslims in Tokyo.

And that is at least partly the result of their immigration policy.

Post by b2016
Hard to argue with, isn't it?

Oh, the Politikal Lorrektness Kooks will give it a burl, you can be
syrew of that.

Post by b2016
Why is it that leftists, atheists and globalists insist that Muslim

Whymis it the you lump thgose three very different groups rogether?

Post by b2016
immigration into the West including Australia is something that must
happen? Don't we have the right to say no?

Apparently not. I've been sating "no" to the leftgard and globalist
agendas since the nineteen seventies. Doesn't seem to have had any
effect.

[T. anomalum]

Why is it that leftists, atheists and globalists insist ...

They have brains. That is why!
Isolationist-populist right-retards never had any, hence their political
orientation and the propaganda they vomit

[hector]

Post by felix

Post by felix
http://allfourestates.com/why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-

immigration/

Post by felix
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/zero-islamic-

terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090
These links argue that the reason why there have been no Islamic
terrorist attacks in Tokyo is because there are no Muslims in Tokyo.
Hard to argue with, isn't it?
Why is it that leftists, atheists and globalists insist that Muslim
immigration into the West including Australia is something that must
happen? Don't we have the right to say no?

Any country that problematic should be declared a non-country until
further notice and annexed.

[hector]

Post by felix
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html
"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured in a
suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night after an Ariana
Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England, authorities said."
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even support
for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP with their
policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl smugglers!
shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic terrorists is
to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that we are not safe
anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political parties that have
zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic terrorist attack in
Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one because of their strict
immigration policies, and conditions on Islamic practices.
http://allfourestates.com/why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

Enforcing diversity these days seems to be exploiting our once openness
and seeking of equality in the 60s and 70s. At the very least much
stronger vetting of immigrants is needed, instead of being bombarded
with propaganda about diversity. Foggy mindedness isn't evidence.

[Fran]

Post by hector

Post by felix
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html
"At least 19 people were killed and about 50 others were injured in a
suspected suicide bombing (now confirmed) Monday night after an Ariana
Grande concert at Manchester Arena in England, authorities said."
This is what the Derchuka, the Dog, Fan-kenstein, et al want for
Australia apparently with their liberal attitude towards, even support
for, muslims and Islamic ideology, and not to mention the ALP with
their policies that would see the resurgence of boat ppl and ppl
smugglers! shame on them! when is enough enough!? the aim of Islamic
terrorists is to make us fearful in our own countries- fearful that we
are not safe anywhere at anytime. we must support ONLY political
parties that have zero tolerance to Islam! when was the last Islamic
terrorist attack in Japan? oh, that's right, there's never been one
because of their strict immigration policies, and conditions on
Islamic practices.
http://allfourestates.com/why-japan-has-no-islamic-terrorism-sakoku-and-immigration/
https://townhall.com/columnists/calebparke/2017/03/23/zero-islamic-terror-attacks-what-london-and-america-need-to-learn-from-japan-n2303090

Enforcing diversity these days seems to be exploiting our once openness
and seeking of equality in the 60s and 70s. At the very least much
stronger vetting of immigrants is needed, instead of being bombarded
with propaganda about diversity. Foggy mindedness isn't evidence.

That foggy mindedness is simply rampant. There are way too many
hysterics who've been whipped up into a frenzy of fear based on hatred
rather than evidence. Pathetic.