Prev: Glass quality and f stop question.
Next: The Value Of An Apology, At Least From A Republican's Perspective!!
From: Bill Graham on 10 Sep 2009 17:09
"Stuffed Crust" <pizza(a)spam.shaftnet.org> wrote in message
> In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>> The shah was not a, "ruthless dictator". My brother-in law knew him
>> personally. He was a good leader, and would have been very beneficial to
>> Iran had he not become sick.
> *snorts beverage out my nose*
> Um... no. no, no, no, no, no.
> I've watched this silly middle-school name calling food fight with a
> sort of detached amusement, but wow... I'll give you the credit that you
> honestly believe what you wrote above, but that doesn't mean it has any
> semblance to what actually went on in Iran.
> The Shah was nearly universally reviled and despised by the average joe,
> and for good reason. Regardless of how "nice a guy" he may have
> appeared to be in person ("A gentleman is someone who says one thing and
> thinks another"), his government was exceedingly corrupt and he ruled
> with an iron fist. Any dissenters tended to "dissappear" without
Somehow, I get the impression that his chief problem was that he was
friendly to the United States, and that means he was slated for
assassination right from the get-go. - I wonder where I got a crazy idea
From: Bill Graham on 10 Sep 2009 18:02
"Giftzwerg" <giftzwerg999(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
In article <eaadnR3yUI3IxDTXnZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, weg9
> >> Don't you know that the pilots who flew those planes into the twin
> >> towers
> >> went to flying school here in the US? - There was much talk at the time
> >> about how they never learned how to land the planes, but just studied
> >> how
> >> to
> >> take them off and/or fly them once in the air.....And why didn't the
> >> instructors inform the FBI of this.....
> > Because the Clinton Justice Department would have promptly investigated
> > the instructors for violating the rights of Peaceful Muslims(TM)?
> > Is this a trick question?
> I am amazed that you didn't know about the pilot training the terrorists
> here in the US. I will Google it for you when I get the chance, as long as
> you refuse to do it yourself......
Don't bother. It's irrelevant. This wasn't a case of the US government
having a hand in training *terrorists*, but an American flight school
doing exactly what it is that they do; accepting students paying for
There's no shadowy conspiracy here, and no one - not the flight school
and certainly not the US government - had any idea that these were
Even today, if a, say, Egyptian wants to come to Stanford and study,
say, microbiology ... do we turn him away on the assumption that he's a
budding practitioner of biological warfare?
No, but the problem wasn't just Arabs learning to fly. there was no harm in
that. It was the fact that they were learning to fly, but not to
land.....this should have raised a flag to their instructors.....Or, at
least, that was the contention at the time. Had your microbiology students
only been interested in deadly pathogens, you might have been rightfully
From: Ray Fischer on 10 Sep 2009 22:44
Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>"Giftzwerg" <giftzwerg999(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>There's no shadowy conspiracy here, and no one - not the flight school
>>and certainly not the US government - had any idea that these were
>>Even today, if a, say, Egyptian wants to come to Stanford and study,
>>say, microbiology ... do we turn him away on the assumption that he's a
>>budding practitioner of biological warfare?
>No, but the problem wasn't just Arabs learning to fly. there was no harm in
>that. It was the fact that they were learning to fly, but not to
>land.....this should have raised a flag to their instructors.....
And you envision a police state where all people are expected to
report any and all suspicious activity to the government?
I vote that we start by reporting you as a dangerous extremist and
From: Ray Fischer on 10 Sep 2009 22:45
Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>The only time Democrats ever get elected is when we are in a depression, and
>it is usually a depression caused chiefly by the Democrats themselves.
But if they only get elected during depressions then how do they cause
the depressions when, as you say, they haven't been elected?
Are you wingnuts even capable of rational thought?
From: Ray Fischer on 10 Sep 2009 22:49
Doug McDonald <mcdonald(a)NoSpAmscs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>> No matter how you slice it, bush was horrible.
>Bush tried very hard to do right.
Given that he spent some 500 days of his terms on vacation that's
a tough claim to justify.
> Very hard indeed.
>The Democrats tried very very very very hard to foil him.
Liar. They didn't even get a majority of Congress until two years
before his term ended.