full-disclosure - An uncontrolled ***OFFTOPIC*** thread ... America's future under George Bush ... my last post in this thread

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue Dec 20 04:20:21 2005
From: umphress at gmail.com (Chris Umphress)
Subject: An uncontrolled ***OFFTOPIC*** thread ...
	America's future under George Bush ... my last post in this thread

On 12/19/05, J.A. Terranson <measl@....org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Chris Umphress wrote:
>
> > On 12/19/05, J.A. Terranson <measl@....org> wrote:
> > >
> > > America is odd in that is is an active supporter of terrorism (Israel), an
> >
> > Come again? Israel is a terrorist state? How in the world did you get
> > your mind bent enough that this even seems right?
>
> repeat it with me:  M-E-N-A-C-H-I-M  B-E-G-I-N.
>
> Isarel was FOUNDED on terrorism, and as with the proverbial tiger, has
> never felt the need to change it's stripes.

I suppose I could argue on either side of that fence. In my mind,
Abraham was there early, so the Israelites were re-claiming their
land. Interesting viewpoint, though.

> > Just a guess, but are you for gun-control also?
>
> I fail to see how these are even remotely related, but i'll bite anyway:
> No, I do not believe in "gun control" (ie confiscation).

My apologies for assuming that you would be for "gun control." In my
experience, most of the people who are anti-Israel are against people
protecting themselves as neccessary. I hadn't thought about your
viewpoint for the beginning of the Israeli nation.

> > Against a person's
> > right to defend his own life and freedom? Oh wait... that's what this
> > whole thread is about. Whether or not people should be able to have
> > the guns they need to protect themselves. As long as people can defend
> > themselves, it almost doesn't matter how big the "weapon" (I see it as
> > a tool, not a weapon) is, but rather the resolve of the people.
>
> So, clearly we are on the same side of *this* fence.  Now, why are we
> here?

Glad to hear that :)

> > In the
> > past, the united States has had few external attacks because it was
> > realized that the people were willing and capable of defending
> > themselves.
>
> And that same confidence has now morphed into a bullying attitude of
> "We're bigger than you, we'll do whatever the hell we damn well please.".

That's a side-effect of so-called "gun control." Cite Germany a few decades ago.

> Except for thos "Axis of Evil" areas that can actually defend themselves
> against an American invasion (vis Kim Jong Il.).  If Kim is so god awful,
> why the hell don't we invade there?  Because he'd blow our fucking asses
> off the landing pad.  A nuclear enema for Shrub.  And a well deserved one
> I might add.

--
Chris Umphress <http://daga.dyndns.org/>