 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / January 2008Another Picture Of My Truck...
For carLito. news:13778og19oslj33@news.supernews.com > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com > For carLito. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers > another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> Those'd be the ones controlled since 1934, right? :-) Dennis > Those'd be the ones controlled since 1934, right? > :-) Prints, pictures and a letter from The Man. On Jun 16, 5:07 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: When did you paint it pink? JF > On Jun 16, 5:07 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > > When did you paint it pink? > > JF its breast cancer awareness in St Louis today (maybe the Country) maybe that's the reason > > On Jun 16, 5:07 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > its breast cancer awareness in St Louis today (maybe the Country) maybe > that's the reason It's breast awareness in So Cal today. That's why I'm heading to the beach. > > On Jun 16, 5:07 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > its breast cancer awareness in St Louis today (maybe the Country) maybe > that's the reason That would be a statement worth making. I've often wondered why more of those big rolling billboards aren't put to better use. Donating them to organizations that serve a public good would be commendable, great public relations. JF >> > On Jun 16, 5:07 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" >> > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > them to organizations that serve a public good would be commendable, > great public relations. Here's one where you and I agree. If you see a Navy Blue truck as pink, though, you might wanna hit your color adjustment (or <cough> take off your rose colored glasses). The dash is Desert Tan. > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com On Jun 16, 11:02 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > >> > On Jun 16, 5:07 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > >> > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > The dash is Desert Tan. What happened to the white one? JF Just curious why you don't post a picture of your current truck with the company name and all on your website. That would stop all the arguments. IMHO you are acting like a prat at the moment > Just curious why you don't post a picture of your current truck with the > company name and all on your website. That would stop all the arguments. What argument? -I'm- not having one, and the only one who is in a non-entity. Most people here know who I drive for, I posted it previously. Several Rec.scubans have been -in- the truck. Other than that, why would anyone want to know? Why do -you- want to know? Got a little Canadian Back Channel going? ;-) > IMHO you are acting like a prat at the moment Why, -exactly-? IMHO, you act like a prat most of the time. > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >> Just curious why you don't post a picture of your current truck with the >> company name and all on your website. That would stop all the arguments. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Most people here know who I drive for, I posted it previously. than why don't you post it again if it isn't a secret > Several Rec.scubans have been -in- the truck. lucky them > Other than that, why would anyone want to know? well whats his/her name wants to know and you keep saying you have/will tell him/her. Quite frankly it would save a lot of your prattish baiting of look at my truck > Why do -you- want to know? > > Got a little Canadian Back Channel going? ;-) well I have relatives in Canada and enjoy spending time there, just as I have and do in the States >> IMHO you are acting like a prat at the moment > > Why, -exactly-? because you go on about this bloody truck the whole time. > IMHO, you act like a prat most of the time. you have every right to your opinion >>> Just curious why you don't post a picture of your current truck with the >>> company name and all on your website. That would stop all the arguments. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > than why don't you post it again if it isn't a secret You still haven't answered- why do you want to know? Why did you blow me off on getting pictures of my truck- and then suddenly change your mind? Get an e-mail from carLito, did you? >> Several Rec.scubans have been -in- the truck. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > well whats his/her name wants to know And won't say why. Can you think of why someone who hates and fears me wants to know my employment information? Not too bright, are you? > and you keep saying you have/will tell him/her. That's a FJF class whopper. I've never said any such thing, at least without a face to face, or an exchange of information, all slithered from. Why aren't you asking carl to identify himself- that's all he needs to do to get his information. You don't have to skulk around after it for him. > Quite frankly it would save a lot of your prattish baiting of look at my > truck Since you professed (eventually) an interest in the pictures, I'm still at a loss to explain your apparent discomfort. Kind of. >> Why do -you- want to know? >> >> Got a little Canadian Back Channel going? ;-) > > well I have relatives in Canada and enjoy spending time there, just as I > have and do in the States Yeah, yeah, -that's it-. >>> IMHO you are acting like a prat at the moment >> >> Why, -exactly-? > > because you go on about this bloody truck the whole time. Sorry mine's a land yacht, and yours is a shitbox. >> IMHO, you act like a prat most of the time. > > you have every right to your opinion And the venue to express it. > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >>>> Just curious why you don't post a picture of your current truck with >>>> the company name and all on your website. That would stop all the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > You still haven't answered- why do you want to know? to finally stop the irrelevent posts about your truck from many people > Why did you blow me off on getting pictures of my truck- and then > suddenly change your mind? ? > Get an e-mail from carLito, did you? ? >>> Several Rec.scubans have been -in- the truck. >> >> lucky them >> >>> Other than that, why would anyone want to know? see above >> well whats his/her name wants to know > > And won't say why. probably to report you for carrying weapons into canada > Can you think of why someone who hates and fears me wants to know my > employment information? but you claimed you had already posted your employment information, so why don't you post it again or were you telling pork pies > Not too bright, are you? I am a search light to your candle >> and you keep saying you have/will tell him/her. > > That's a FJF class whopper. ? > I've never said any such thing, at least without a face to face, or an > exchange of information, all slithered from. sorry you claimed that you posted all this information before > Why aren't you asking carl to identify himself- that's all he needs to do > to get his information. I shall. > You don't have to skulk around after it for him. I just want to stop these inane posts about your truck. As you said you have posted all this information before >> Quite frankly it would save a lot of your prattish baiting of look at my >> truck > > Since you professed (eventually) an interest in the pictures, I'm still > at a loss to explain your apparent discomfort. what discomfort? > Kind of. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Sorry mine's a land yacht, and yours is a shitbox. actually it is a lot of the time use it mainly for transporting cattle, my big red truck is however very clean. Want to see a picture of it? >>> IMHO, you act like a prat most of the time. >> >> you have every right to your opinion > > And the venue to express it. Ah the joys of usenet > "Douglas W. "Popeye" Frederick" <Popeye@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote in >>>>>>>>>> Just curious why you don't post a picture of your current truck >>>>>>>>>> with [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > to finally stop the irrelevent posts about your truck from many people What an onslaught. There must have been 10 or 12 in 8 months. >> Why did you blow me off on getting pictures of my truck- and then >> suddenly change your mind? > > ? Check. >> Get an e-mail from carLito, did you? > > ? Check. >>>> Several Rec.scubans have been -in- the truck. >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > probably to report you for carrying weapons into canada So I should get -right- on your and his request, eh? >> Can you think of why someone who hates and fears me wants to know my >> employment information? > > but you claimed you had already posted your employment information, so why > don't you post it again or were you telling pork pies Go find it. It took me less than a minute. You're the one that wants to know. All of the sudden. For whatever reason... >> Not too bright, are you? > I am a search light to your candle Blinding, yes. >>> and you keep saying you have/will tell him/her. >> >> That's a FJF class whopper. > > ? <snicker> It's a code. >> I've never said any such thing, at least without a face to face, or an >> exchange of information, all slithered from. > > sorry you claimed that you posted all this information before Yes, but, that's not telling him I'll tell him, as you clearly wrote. You've been hanging around with Francis too much. >> Why aren't you asking carl to identify himself- that's all he needs to >> do to get his information. > > I shall. Good luck. That prison bitch has 5 speeds in reverse, and, one forward, incase he gets attacked from behind. >> You don't have to skulk around after it for him. > > I just want to stop these inane posts about your truck. As you said you > have posted all this information before Oh, yeah, sure. I see. Like with Lee's posts last month. Even though you said you wanted to see pictures of my truck, for some reason you only want to see certain ones. Riiiiiight. >>> Quite frankly it would save a lot of your prattish baiting of look at my >>> truck [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > what discomfort? That I post them. It seems to bother you that they don't identify my employer, hence your repeated postings. For whoever. >> Kind of. >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > actually it is a lot of the time use it mainly for transporting cattle, my > big red truck is however very clean. Want to see a picture of it? Absolutely. But surely after this rant of yours, you won't post any reference to it here, right? >>>> IMHO, you act like a prat most of the time. >>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Ah the joys of usenet Like the man says, we're all hear for the entertainment... > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com snip >> probably to report you for carrying weapons into canada > > So I should get -right- on your and his request, eh? but you have already posted all the details haven't you? >>> Can you think of why someone who hates and fears me wants to know my >>> employment information? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Go find it. I think you have been telling porky pies naughty Popeye > It took me less than a minute. so iIF it is there post the link becuase it is public information > You're the one that wants to know. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Blinding, yes. yep >>>> and you keep saying you have/will tell him/her. >>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > You've been hanging around with Francis too much. who or what is Francis >>> Why aren't you asking carl to identify himself- that's all he needs to >>> do to get his information. [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > That I post them. no discomfort > It seems to bother you that they don't identify my employer, hence your > repeated postings. whatever but it is irrelevent surely because you claim you have posted all the details > For whoever. > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > But surely after this rant of yours, you won't post any reference to it > here, right? http://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/file_system/attachments/State/Attachment_20050901_6FC7 5F81.pdf or sometimes this one http://www.rfs.nsw.gov.au/file_system/attachments/State/Attachment_20050302_31A8 1783.pdf <snip> > who or what is Francis Francis is JOF's last name - John O Francis - JOF. <snip> On Jun 17, 8:16 am, "Dennis \(Icarus\)" <nojunkm...@ever.invalid> wrote: > <snip> > > > who or what is Francis > > Francis is JOF's last name - John O Francis - JOF. Not to be confused with the dive magazine writer of the same name. There seemed to be a little confusion at the outset of my visits here but once folks figgered out that I wasn't a celeb that was the end of my free ride. 8) JF > <snip> >> >> who or what is Francis > > Francis is JOF's last name - John O Francis - JOF. thanks muchly > who or what is Francis A talking mule... http://www.answers.com/topic/francis-the-talking-mule On Jun 18, 12:26 am, Grumman-581 <grumman...@DIE-SPAMMER-SCUM- gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 14:01:11 +1000, "dechucka" > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > http://www.answers.com/topic/francis-the-talking-mule Those movies were the bane of my existence as a kid in elementary school. It was small consolation that my namesake was the straight man to his military sidekick. JF On Jun 16, 8:18 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > Got a little Canadian Back Channel going? ;-) Is that paranoioa I hear? JF > On Jun 16, 8:18 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > >> Got a little Canadian Back Channel going? ;-) > > Is that paranoioa I hear? I'd be surprised if you hear anything. But no, it's experience. You even admitted it once. > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >> On Jun 16, 8:18 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" >> <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > You even admitted it once. is that why you to Canada Popeye for a bit of the back channel play? Illegal in the US is it? On Jun 16, 10:56 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > > On Jun 16, 8:18 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > You even admitted it once. Two friends talking privately doth not always a conspiracy make. Assuming otherwise is paranoioa. JF > On Jun 16, 10:56 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Two friends talking privately doth not always a conspiracy make. > Assuming otherwise is paranoioa. That's not what you said. You said that "you had been warned about me" and that they were obviously right. You were wrong of course, and I proved it. It was about posting e-mails, but I'm sure you don't remember. > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com On Jun 17, 10:19 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > > On Jun 16, 10:56 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > It was about posting e-mails, but I'm sure you don't remember. Ah yes, I remember that exchange. You didn't exactly cover yerself in glory on that one. Seems to me we were doing a little of what you call "back-channeling" ourselves (others refer to it as an exchange of emails) because I suggested that our discussion was too boring or somesuch to inflict on rec.scubans any longer. You posted some part of it so you could gloat to the peanut gallery. I told you that I'd been warned about your propensity for posting emails. They were obviously right. It explains why you're paranoid about private conversations. You need to get over the paranoioa, dude. You can't be as offensive as you are here and not be the subject of some outside discussion. Fact is, more often than not I've defended you in whatever conversations I've had about you. You just like to mix it up here on rec.scuba but in fact are a pretty decent guy IRL. If it wasn't guns it would be something else for entertainment here. JF > On Jun 17, 10:19 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > Ah yes, I remember that exchange. Apparently not. >You didn't exactly cover yerself in > glory on that one. One of us didn't. You ended our friendship over it. >Seems to me we were doing a little of what you call > "back-channeling" ourselves (others refer to it as an exchange of > emails) because I suggested that our discussion was too boring or > somesuch to inflict on rec.scubans any longer. No, you slithered from a discussion here, I suggested you would do better in e-mail, you said you'd give it a try. After a mediocre effort, you then returned to discussing it here, and ignored e-mails, so I posted our exchange here. Maybe you'll still remember the still unanswered "vacuous" posting, that your "server dropped". >You posted some part of > it so you could gloat to the peanut gallery. I told you that I'd been > warned about your propensity for posting emails. They were obviously > right. It explains why you're paranoid about private conversations. You issued the usual insults about honor and character that you continually attribute to others, and that ended our friendship. I then reminded you that I had announced the intention to post the results of the discussion beforehand. You called me a liar. I then, as -always- found the post and reposted it for all to see and you mumbled a pathetic apology, but the damage was done. > You need to get over the paranoioa, dude. You need to double up on the Geritol and Ginkoba. I could post the entire exchange, but, you'd just deny it anyway, right? >You can't be as offensive as > you are here and not be the subject of some outside discussion. Fact [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > JF > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com On Jun 17, 7:24 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > > On Jun 17, 10:19 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > > Ah yes, I remember that exchange. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > You ended our friendship over it. Wrong again Skippy. You ended it because you obviously are only interested in friends who suck up. JF > On Jun 17, 7:24 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Wrong again Skippy. You ended it because you obviously are only > interested in friends who suck up. Another oft repeated, and continually disproven, Futile John Francis lie. > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com > On Jun 17, 7:24 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Wrong again Skippy. You ended it because you obviously are only > interested in friends who suck up. Nope. I could give coutnerexamples, but we've had this discussion before. Dennis >> On Jun 17, 7:24 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" >> <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Dennis He forgets. In fact, he forgot, after three or four postings, to give any examples of his repeated accusations of "touching up" and "editorializing" it the Lying Piece Of sh.t thread. One -and- two. Imagine that. > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com On Jun 17, 11:52 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 17, 7:24 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > >> <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > his repeated accusations of "touching up" and "editorializing" it the Lying > Piece Of sh.t thread. I'm rationing your motivational material. You are a very efficient machine, a little fuel goes a long long way. JF > On Jun 17, 11:52 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > I'm rationing your motivational material. You are a very efficient > machine, a little fuel goes a long long way. Well, here we agree, and, the work is easy, fun, and enjoyable. > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com On Jun 18, 10:17 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: > > On Jun 17, 11:52 pm, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Well, here we agree, and, the work is easy, fun, and enjoyable. Glad to hear you're having fun too. There have been moments when I wondered if maybe you were a tad miffed. JF > On Jun 18, 10:17 am, "Douglas W. \"Popeye\" Frederick" > <Pop...@finalprotectivefire.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > Glad to hear you're having fun too. There have been moments when I > wondered if maybe you were a tad miffed. Like when -you- brought up your son's death, and then started squalling about us discussing it? Nah, not a bit. Remember, we're just here for fun. You've had some pretty sparky rants, though. Remember "guns, guns, and more guns", where you wigged out made up all that stuff? Oh. Of course not. > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com snip I showed you mine so why don't you show me yours' in all its glory company name and all. Or are you embareressed about the size of yours. I'm OK with mine it is only HEAVY vehicle but is all I need to do what I have to do. Or maybe your more interested in a bit of back channelling in Canada. What do you do hang around the toilets in the truckers stops. :-) :-) > snip > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > :-) I could be wrong, but didn't you just post brochure type information (including pictures) of a generic vehicle used in fire fighting type situations? Or, was it actually the trucks you drive that were used for their promotional literature? >> snip >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > (including pictures) of a generic vehicle used in fire fighting type > situations? Yep I don't actually have any photos of my truck RFS or cattle/horse. Even if I did it wouldn't show you much they are just bloody trucks > Or, was it actually the trucks you drive that were used for their > promotional literature? actually the pictures shown are not " promotional" they come from the RFS website but are exactly the same as the ones I drive > >> snip > >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Yep I don't actually have any photos of my truck RFS or cattle/horse. Even > if I did it wouldn't show you much they are just bloody trucks So, you want Popeye to post pictured of his actual truck and, in recompense, you're willing to post pictures of trucks that are the same as the one you drive? > So, you want Popeye to post pictured of his actual truck and, in recompense, > you're willing to post pictures of trucks that are the same as the one you > drive? they should stop while they are behind, but they never do kinda like ole combat and his TOS complaints >> >> snip >> >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > you're willing to post pictures of trucks that are the same as the one you > drive? I have no desire to see Popeyes truck I just suggested if he did it would stop some of the inane truck threads "Just curious why you don't post a picture of your current truck with the company name and all on your website. That would stop all the arguments." as you see from my OP i expressed no desire to see his truck. > "Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@gamil.com> wrote in message I have no desire to > see Popeyes truck I just suggested if he did it would stop some of the > inane truck threads "Just curious why you don't post a picture of your > current truck with the company name and all on your website. That would > stop all the arguments." as you see from my OP i expressed no desire to > see his truck. What a porkie pie. Still waiting for that apology you said you wanted to make. Still waiting for Futile John to post where he works. >> "Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@gamil.com> wrote in message I have no desire >> to see Popeyes truck I just suggested if he did it would stop some of the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Still waiting for that apology you said you wanted to make. for what? next > Still waiting for Futile John to post where he works. why do you want to know? >>> "Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@gamil.com> wrote in message I have no desire >>> to see Popeyes truck I just suggested if he did it would stop some of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > for what? next I already told told you, but you were pie porking again. >> Still waiting for Futile John to post where he works. > > why do you want to know? Stop posting in this thread! > So which one will you ban and confiscate? I don't know much about the different guns but based on the tv I watch there are lots of automatic weapons out there. In fact I'm sure they're in the majority, certainly in the handgun department. I guess my concern would be with the more easily concealed weapons capable of firing sustained bursts at extreme cycling rates. I think they're often called full auto, but it seems to me that any weapon that chambers another round automatically should probably be called an automatic. <snip> > >> Since you intend to confiscate them, I'm sure you know what I mean. > > Did I say I would confiscate them? > Yes, several times. Delusion. -JOF "Life is too short to be little. Man is never so manly as when he feels deeply, acts boldly, and expresses himself with frankness and with fervor." ~Benjamin Disraeli~ Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >>>> "Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@gamil.com> wrote in message I have no desire >>>> to see Popeyes truck I just suggested if he did it would stop some of [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >>>>> "Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@gamil.com> wrote in message I have no >>>>> desire to see Popeyes truck I just suggested if he did it would stop [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >> >> Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com Calm down, dude, and type before you hit send. It's just Usenet. Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >>>>>> "Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@gamil.com> wrote in message I have no >>>>>> desire to see Popeyes truck I just suggested if he did it would stop [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Calm down, dude, and type before you hit send. I'm so calm that I deceided not to type but just let my thoughts drift over to you. ps bugger if know what happened with that post >>>> "Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@gamil.com> wrote in message I have no desire >>>> to see Popeyes truck I just suggested if he did it would stop some of [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I already told told you, but you were pie porking again. just like you already posted your employers name. Come on you keep claiming you have done these things but you can't back it up >>> Still waiting for Futile John to post where he works. >> >> why do you want to know? > > Stop posting in this thread! Why? I'll try this again >>>> "Chris Guynn" <chris.guynn@gamil.com> wrote in message I have no desire >>>> to see Popeyes truck I just suggested if he did it would stop some of [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I already told told you, but you were pie porking again. you seem to have an infatuation with having sex with pastries, why? >>> Still waiting for Futile John to post where he works. >> >> why do you want to know? > > Stop posting in this thread! No! Australia is a free country!!!! " Australians all let us rejoice for we are young and free ......................... etc " > I'll try this again > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > you seem to have an infatuation with having sex with pastries, why? What part of "-you- were" did you miss? >>>> Still waiting for Futile John to post where he works. >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > " Australians all let us rejoice for we are young and free > ......................... etc " More pork!! >> I'll try this again >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > What part of "-you- were" did you miss? as I don't the is obviusly a fantasy of yours watching people porking pies. Hence the infatuation comments. >>>>> Still waiting for Futile John to post where he works. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > More pork!! yum I like pork <snip> > > More pork!! > > yum I like pork Be careful, yhou might tick off some Muslims. Dennis > <snip> >> > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Be careful, yhou might tick off some Muslims. or Jews or Christians but hey they what they want to do and I will do what I want to do unless it effects other people adversely > Dennis >> <snip> >>> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > or Jews or Christians but hey they what they want to do and I will do what > I want to do unless it effects other people adversely Ah. Another on topic post, I see.  Signature"I wasn't going to get into any of this until later, but you asked a reasonable question. The problem for me in answering is that I'm theorizing with more intuited logic than facts." -JOF Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >>> <snip> >>>> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Another on topic post, I see. in an off topic thread everything is on topic because it is all off topic to the ng :-) >>>> <snip> >>>>> > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > in an off topic thread everything is on topic because it is all off topic > to the ng So you'll have no more of these porkie pies about trying to stop off topic posting? Signature"I wasn't going to get into any of this until later, but you asked a reasonable question. The problem for me in answering is that I'm theorizing with more intuited logic than facts." -JOF Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >>>>> <snip> >>>>>> > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > So you'll have no more of these porkie pies about trying to stop off > topic posting? I can't stop OT postings this is Usenet. I would love to see at least the majority of threads on this ng OnT but that isn't going to happen > >>>>> <snip> > >>>>>> > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > I can't stop OT postings this is Usenet. I would love to see at least the > majority of threads on this ng OnT but that isn't going to happen Particularly when you keep contributing to the off topic stuff? As I've said before - feel free to start a diving thread. If its worthy, folks will join in. If not...well....try again. Looks like you're having a fairly enjoyable time in these off-topic threads though. Dennis > in >> >> message news:137r93cp8hcsq98@news.supernews.com... [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > As I've said before - feel free to start a diving thread. done > If its worthy, folks will join in. > If not...well....try again. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Dennis > > <snip> > >> > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > or Jews or Christians but hey they what they want to do and I will do what I > want to do unless it effects other people adversely Christians don't have much of a problem with pork, IIRC. Jews consider pork to be an unclean animal, as do the Muslims, but you don't have too many Jews lopping the heads off of infidels or blowing themselves up trying to kill others. Heck, even the BBC biases its reports (self-admitted) to avoid ticking off Muslims. Christians, on the other hand, are of no concern to 'em. :-) Dennis >> > <snip> >> >> > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > have too many Jews lopping the heads off of infidels or blowing themselves > up trying to kill others. exactly anyone can have their beliefs as long as they don't interfere with others. Here we had the local tyke bishop threatening Members of Parliament with hell if they voted for stem cell research. Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others > >> > <snip> > >> >> > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others Do try to explain that to the jihadists. Let us know how it works out. Dennis >> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others > > Do try to explain that to the jihadists. > Let us know how it works out. Most Moslems I know are very sane and normal people. You get nutters in all religions, the mad moslems, those good old christians who like blowing up abortion clinics and murdering the Drs, the Hindus who burn down other peoples churches etc etc. Than of course there are the people who push religion for political ends. > >> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > abortion clinics and murdering the Drs, the Hindus who burn down other > peoples churches etc etc. IIRC the clinic bombings stopped once Eric Rudolph was captured. One nut against how many jihadists? > Than of course there are the people who push religion for political ends. dennis >> >> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others >> > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > IIRC the clinic bombings stopped once Eric Rudolph was captured. > One nut against how many jihadists? many so what just goes to show that there are nuttersin all religions next >> Than of course there are the people who push religion for political ends. > > dennis > >> >> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others > >> > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > many so what just goes to show that there are nuttersin all religions And I'm glad you realize this. Now, would you agree that, currently, there are many more nutters, currently causing trouble based on religion, on the Muslim side of things? Lets see, to avoid offending Muslims, fols considered changing the play "three little pigs" to "three little <whatever>" To avoid offending muslims, the BBC has said they'd not report some items. Dennis >> >> >> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others >> >> > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > currently > causing trouble based on religion, on the Muslim side of things? yes >>> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Than of course there are the people who push religion for political ends. No comparison. I think of the world wide rioting over silly a.s pictures of the prophet with his explosive do-rag, and compare that to the frequent "What Would Jesus Do <for a klondike bar>" bumperstickers everywhere, that we try not to bust out laughing about. No comparison. Signature"I wasn't going to get into any of this until later, but you asked a reasonable question. The problem for me in answering is that I'm theorizing with more intuited logic than facts." -JOF Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >>>> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others >>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > No comparison. There certainly is a comparison > >>>> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others > >>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > There certainly is a comparison Yes, there is indeed. Muslims rioted due to a perceived offense against Muhammed & Islam. Christians, on the other hand, did........ over those bumber stickers? Do you see now why folks are taking such pains to avoid offending Muslims, while not really caring too much if they offend Christians? Think thats why the BBC (self-admitted) would bias its reporting? Dennis >> >>>> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others >> >>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Muslims rioted due to a perceived offense against Muhammed & Islam. > Christians, on the other hand, did........ over those bumber stickers? In your own politics look how carefully people tread not to upset the Christian right >>> >>>> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others >>> >>> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > In your own politics look how carefully people tread not to upset the > Christian right There's a pretty unusual interpretation of the Democratic Party, probably about half the country. Not to mention the Libertarians. Just goes to show you how slanted, and inaccurate, foreign perception is. Signature"I wasn't going to get into any of this until later, but you asked a reasonable question. The problem for me in answering is that I'm theorizing with more intuited logic than facts." -JOF Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com >>>> >>>> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others >>>> >>> [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > There's a pretty unusual interpretation of the Democratic Party, probably > about half the country. your not really the sharpest pin in the box are you popeye? >>>>> >>>> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others >>>>> >>> [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > your not really the sharpest pin in the box are you popeye? It's easier for you to just say "oh, yeah, I was wrong". But you've been hanging around with the Canadian Club too much. Note the context snip. Signature"I wasn't going to get into any of this until later, but you asked a reasonable question. The problem for me in answering is that I'm theorizing with more intuited logic than facts." -JOF Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com > >>>>> > "dechucka" <dechucka@vomithotmail.com> wrote in message news:467dd80e$0$29008$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au... > >>>>> >>>> Each to their own beliefs but don't try and force them on others > >>>>> >>> [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Note the context snip. I liked how he skipped over my requesxt for a "for instance". :-) Dennis > in >> > message news:137ts10oc02hf0c@news.supernews.com... [quoted text clipped - 60 lines] > > I liked how he skipped over my requesxt for a "for instance". :-) It's the company he keeps. :-) Signature"I wasn't going to get into any of this until later, but you asked a reasonable question. The problem for me in answering is that I'm theorizing with more intuited logic than facts." -JOF Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com snip > I liked how he skipped over my requesxt for a "for instance". :-) sorry what for instance was that? I will answer if I can > snip > > > I liked how he skipped over my requesxt for a "for instance". :-) > > sorry what for instance was that? I will answer if I can You wrote > >> In your own politics look how carefully people tread not to upset the > >> Christian right I wrote > > They do? You wrote > Yes I then wrote First I've heard of that. Got a for-instance? Which I then clarified with differentiating politicians on the right trying to not antagonize a sizeable part of their base. Is that what you meant? After all, I can counter with the fact that the left do seem to take great pains to antagonize the "christian right". SignatureDennis "For instance, on planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much - the wheel, New York, wars and so on, while all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were more intelligent than man, for precisely the same reasons." --Douglas Adams, The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, chapter 23. >> snip >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > trying > to not antagonize a sizeable part of their base. which I think shows my point > Is that what you meant? After all, I can counter with the fact that the > left > do seem to take great pains to antagonize the "christian right". that is not there power base >>> snip >>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > that is not there power base so I think I have answered your " for instance" and had done so at the time. > >>> snip > >>> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > so I think I have answered your " for instance" and had done so at the time. No, you didn't. Dennis > >> snip > >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > which I think shows my point No, it doesn't. Still, I gave you a couple of specific instances, and could give more, about folks doing their level-best to avoid offending Muslims alomg with reaction from ticked off Muslims. > > Is that what you meant? After all, I can counter with the fact that the > > left > > do seem to take great pains to antagonize the "christian right". > > that is not there power base Which would tend to reinforce the point that its political, and not religious? In other words, Not Be The Same Thing. Dennis >>> snip >>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > which I think shows my point Not for anyone who isn't a dipshit. No politician intentionally antagonizes their voting base. But a majority of our opposition pols -do- antagonize them, so no, it doesn't show your point. >> Is that what you meant? After all, I can counter with the fact that the >> left >> do seem to take great pains to antagonize the "christian right". > > that is not there power base Signature"I wasn't going to get into any of this until later, but you asked a reasonable question. The problem for me in answering is that I'm theorizing with more intuited logic than facts." -JOF Popeye/ www.finalprotectivefire.com > >>> snip > >>> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > But a majority of our opposition pols -do- antagonize them, so no, it > doesn't show your point. Its not like the Christian right has a lot of places to go. tick off Muslims - rioting, fatwahs calling for your death, tick off chrisitian right -they might vote agaisnt you or stay home on election day Dennis |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message