Um, Ken..., or, suddenly, $24,000.00 for a evening out in NYC seems like a bargain...

On Nov 6, 12:43*pm, DaveS wrote:
On Nov 6, 5:43*am, D. LaCourse wrote:

On 2010-11-05 23:44:51 -0400, DaveS said:

Did you read Ken's post? He was talking about the OPERATING SYSTEM,
not all the other material you focused on. Hit him on what he said,
not on what you wanted him to say.

Kenny's pathological hatred of the U.S. military has been obvious for
years, Dave. *That's is what I was hitting him on. *The crew did the
best that they could under the circumstances. *The same with the
Pueblo. *Kenny doesn't understand *anything* about national security,
and certainly nothing about the NSG or NSA.

Yep, Ken is skeptical

Nah, the doughboy isn't skeptical, he's a parrot.....and like all such
he is entirely untainted by anything resembling an intellectual or
moral position on anything.

and less than adulatory as to the US military.

Adulation should be used sparingly and selectively.....if at all. It
ALWAYS leads to trouble.

And that gets old, ****es people off, me included, and gets a general
negative reaction. If you haven't noticed its not too popular an
attitude round here.

Doesn't bother me much.

It ****es me off about as much as his anti-Mormon
slurs.

The fundamental difference between the Mormons and rest of the world's
great loony tunes (i.e., the Christians, the Jews, the Muslims, the
Hindus, the Buddhists, the Zoroastrians, etc., etc., ad nauseum) is
that their lunacy is still fresh enough to retain its obvious
hilarity.

Aside from that, Christopher Hitchens is a pig, but an extremely
articulate and often highly accurate one. He's absolutely right about
at least one thing; ALL religion and nationalism are toxic.

But you are blind and insultingly quick to scream commie and socialist
and treason to anyone who questions or disagrees with your take on
various subjects. Anybody snidely call you a traitor lately? Nope?
Whatever you think, it is not because they see you as a soldier hero,
but is because such tactics are borish, craven and dishonest by most
peoples standards.

Old news. Old enough to qualify in spades as "not news."

Ken's post is factual.

Which is not at all the same thing as honest, useful, to the point,
heartfelt, meaningful, etc.

Your post is emotional.

Not to mention stupid, spiteful, irrational, hackneyed, hate-filled,
hate-inspired, hateful, and stupid.

But for all your spout, you walk right on past one of the major
security **** UPS of the Bush era. You pretend that it was too much to
expect the crew to get rid of the NSA OPERATING SYSTEM. AND it was too
much to expect the govt to prevent the Chinese and who knows who else,
from reading all our ****, by dawdling for 5 years, apparently to feed
favored beltway bandits. Most on this board have little appreciation
for what a big screw up this is. It sabotages HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF
INTELL INVESTMENTS .

This is MAJOR MAJOR. If you cannot see that, if you want to pretend it
was not a major failure of the last administration, of the Pentagon,
it is not Ken's loyalty that should be in question, but your
rationality. That the Obamites quietly fixed it was just too much for
you I guess? This ****up and coverup seriously impaired our national
security, and put at risk each and every American and especially our
servicemen and women. You know that.

The good news is that none of that is news. Oh, the particular
incident under discussion may be of some passing interest to someone
who has absolutely nothing better to do (a sizeable fraction of the
population, it must be admitted.....but that's beside the point), but
the whole thing is S.O.P. Every government at every level in every
place in the world in every era has consistently lied, covered up,
dissembled, misinformed, disinformed, propagandized, browbeat, twisted
and distorted data, simply ignored whatever might refute or undermine
their position, imprisoned or murdered or otherwise silenced those
with the temerity to be persistent in criticism, enquiry, or
difference of opinion, and otherwise abused, insulted, subjugated, and
sneered at the populace they nominally serve.

And you expect all of this to change?....now?

You don't like the mouth you heard it from, but you know it is a big
deal. *I am truly sorry I feel I have to write this in a public
forum.

Well, you didn't REALLY have to.

Dave
And I noticed you did not compare these events with the LIBERTY, where
our surviving people were destroying material even after the Israelis
strafed and napalmed them. And the coverup of that betrayal continues.

More not news.

giles
whose vigil in expectation of the arrival of the philosopher kings
begins to wax wearisome.

On 2010-11-06 13:43:51 -0400, DaveS said:

But you are blind and insultingly quick to scream commie and socialist
and treason to anyone who questions or disagrees with your take on
various subjects. Anybody snidely call you a traitor lately? Nope?

Ken IS a socialist. That is a given. And I doubt he would want to see
*any* victory by the US military.

Whatever you think, it is not because they see you as a soldier hero,

I'm no hero, never pretended to be. I've know a dozen or so, however.
I know a few cowards too, and Fortenberry is one of them.

but is because such tactics are borish, craven and dishonest by most
peoples standards.

Ken's childish anti-military outbursts are borish, craven and dishonest
by most peoples standards.

Ken's post is factual. Your post is emotional.

Perhaps mine was emotional, but his did not contain all the facts. You
ever flown on an Elint collector, David. Not a helluva lot of room to
move around, and with it almost upside-down and in a steep dive where
all on board probably thought, "this is it," strapped in their seats,
it is not to be expected that they could get emergency destruction of
*anything*. Bottom line, the loss of the operating system did us no
harm. We should be worried about the fact that China *owns* us. We
can never pay back what the have lent us, and now we are devaluing the
dollar by monitizing the debt. I bet *that* made the Chinese real
happy.

But for all your spout, you walk right on past one of the major
security **** UPS of the Bush era.

Gads, David. It took you only a few paragraphs to blame it all on
Bush. What a guy. I heard he was flying co-pilot that day.

You pretend that it was too much to
expect the crew to get rid of the NSA OPERATING SYSTEM.

See my words above. The plane was upside-down, in a fast and steep
dive. The fact that they could erase anything or do *anything* with the
most secret of stuff is just unrealistic.

AND it was too
much to expect the govt to prevent the Chinese and who knows who else,
from reading all our ****, by dawdling for 5 years, apparently to feed
favored beltway bandits. Most on this board have little appreciation
for what a big screw up this is. It sabotages HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF
INTELL INVESTMENTS .

Oh, caca. John Walker was a far more damaging event, and it caused us
no harm. We didn't even know about it, and the Russians did nothing to
us. Stop crying, David. The sky is not falling.

This is MAJOR MAJOR. If you cannot see that, if you want to pretend it
was not a major failure of the last administration, of the Pentagon,
it is not Ken's loyalty that should be in question, but your
rationality.

I have always doubted Ken's loyalty, because of his anti-military cry
baby antics. I think he favors a socialist structure where everyone is
miserable like he is.

That the Obamites quietly fixed it was just too much for
you I guess? This ****up and coverup seriously impaired our national
security, and put at risk each and every American and especially our
servicemen and women. You know that.

Look at John Walker. Far more serious and *nothing* happened.

You don't like the mouth you heard it from, but you know it is a big
deal. I am truly sorry I feel I have to write this in a public
forum.

Oh, come on, David. You have written more dastardly, pathetic things
in this public forum. Your denigration of Mike Connor was one of your
most shameful. Live with it. You're a big boy. You can handle it.

Dave
And I noticed you did not compare these events with the LIBERTY, where
our surviving people were destroying material even after the Israelis
strafed and napalmed them. And the coverup of that betrayal continues.

The Liberty is not the same thing. Those guys AND the men on that
aircraft are all heroes. Both incidents, as well as the Pueblo, are
unfortunate. But, as long as there is a Russian, China, North Korea,
Iran, etc, there will be electronic spying, and more lives will be
lost. That is a given.

Dave
(Your defense of Fortenberry comes as no suprise, BTW.) d;o)

On 2010-11-06 16:15:22 -0400, Ken Fortenberry
said:


I am able to respect a persons service in the military but I
cannot respect the military. I can likewise respect a persons
right to worship any way they please without respecting the
cult in which they worship.

You are a liar. And a coward.

Louie

On Nov 6, 6:38*pm, D. LaCourse wrote:
On 2010-11-06 16:15:22 -0400, Ken Fortenberry
said:



I am able to respect a persons service in the military but I
cannot respect the military. I can likewise respect a persons
right to worship any way they please without respecting the
cult in which they worship.

You are a liar. *And a coward.

Louie

And you're a moron. And a pig.

g.
to whom it looks like about a horse apiece.

On Nov 6, 4:32*pm, D. LaCourse wrote:
On 2010-11-06 13:43:51 -0400, DaveS said:

But you are blind and insultingly quick to scream commie and socialist
and treason to anyone who questions or disagrees with your take on
various subjects. Anybody snidely call you a traitor lately? Nope?

Ken IS a socialist. *That is a given. *And I doubt he would want to see
*any* victory by the US military.

Whatever you think, it is not because they see you as a soldier hero,

I'm no hero, never pretended to be. *I've know a dozen or so, however. *
I know a few cowards too, and Fortenberry is one of them.

but is because such tactics are borish, craven and dishonest by most
peoples standards.

Ken's childish anti-military outbursts are borish, craven and dishonest
by most peoples standards.

Ken's post is factual. Your post is emotional.

Perhaps mine was emotional, but his did not contain all the facts. *You
ever flown on an Elint collector, David. *Not a helluva lot of room to
move around, and with it almost upside-down and in a steep dive where
all on board probably thought, "this is it," strapped in their seats,
it is not to be expected that they could get emergency destruction of
*anything*. *Bottom line, the loss of the operating system did us no
harm. *We should be worried about the fact that China *owns* us. *We
can never pay back what the have lent us, and now we are devaluing the
dollar by monitizing the debt. *I bet *that* made the Chinese real
happy.



But for all your spout, you walk right on past one of the major
security **** UPS of the Bush era.

Gads, David. *It took you only a few paragraphs to blame it all on
Bush. *What a guy. *I heard he was flying co-pilot that day.

You pretend that it was too much to
expect the crew to get rid of the NSA OPERATING SYSTEM.

See my words above. *The plane was upside-down, in a fast and steep
dive. The fact that they could erase anything or do *anything* with the
most secret of stuff is just unrealistic.

AND it was too
much to expect the govt to prevent the Chinese and who knows who else,
from reading all our ****, by dawdling for 5 years, apparently to feed
favored beltway bandits. Most on this board have little appreciation
for what a big screw up this is. It sabotages HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF
INTELL INVESTMENTS .

Oh, caca. *John Walker was a far more damaging event, and it caused us
no harm. *We didn't even know about it, and the Russians did nothing to
us. *Stop crying, David. *The sky is not falling.



This is MAJOR MAJOR. If you cannot see that, if you want to pretend it
was not a major failure of the last administration, of the Pentagon,
it is not Ken's loyalty that should be in question, but your
rationality.

I have always doubted Ken's loyalty, because of his anti-military cry
baby antics. *I think he favors a socialist structure where everyone is
miserable like he is.

That the Obamites quietly fixed it was just too much for
you I guess? This ****up and coverup seriously impaired our national
security, and put at risk each and every American and especially our
servicemen and women. You know that.

Look at John Walker. *Far more serious and *nothing* happened.



You don't like the mouth you heard it from, but you know it is a big
deal. *I am truly sorry I feel I have to write this in a public
forum.

Oh, come on, David. *You have written more dastardly, pathetic things
in this public forum. *Your denigration of Mike Connor was one of your
most shameful. *Live with it. *You're a big boy. *You can handle it..



Dave
And I noticed you did not compare these events with the LIBERTY, where
our surviving people were destroying material even after the Israelis
strafed and napalmed them. And the coverup of that betrayal continues.

The Liberty is not the same thing. *Those guys AND the men on that
aircraft are all heroes. *Both incidents, as well as the Pueblo, are
unfortunate. *But, as long as there is a Russian, China, North Korea,
Iran, etc, there will be electronic spying, and more lives will be
lost. *That is a given.

Dave
(Your defense of Fortenberry comes as no suprise, BTW.) * d;o)

1. You still cannot address the fact that the Bushies played games
with it for 5 years and the Obamites dealt with it straight off. And
unlike your clowns, did not rub it in anyone's face. The Chinese had
complete access to our intelligence networks for 5 years and your
Republican buddies covered it up. No wonder none of them had any skin
in the game and Bush snuck around like a ghost and Cheney stayed in
his bunker.

2. If as you say no damage was done, you would have to have all kinds
of info that I know you just do not have. Period. But, if that were
the case, and if it were the case for the Walkers, then what you are
saying is that all this intell stuff is a big waste. So therefore why
is it again that this is such heroic work in your book?

3. Your take on all the former intell guys who are now rich: Give it a
rest. I do know a bit about the beltway banditry, and while some of
the slots are filled by guys of high competence, there are also many
turkeys on turkey farms, so enough of that bull****. It is deeply
insulting to folks who have made up the budget slack in education,
REAL science, healthcare, etc., while the Sargent Bilkos of the
endless Cold War era wasted billions. And I personally know it
continues. The facts are that the military and the civilian contractor
system needs to become allot better at defending this country against
cyber threats. A shake up and a shake out of turkeys is long over due.
You and I may not like the way Ken said it but he is right.

4. As to "he whose name cannot be spoken" you are right, somewhere
along the line I must have forgot that I drugged him, made him take
and post his nude pix, and am directly responsible for all the crazy
and nasty **** he pulled over the years. NOT. Fact is if you want to
fellowship him, go to it.

5. As to Ken's loyalty . . . fact is your emotional irrationality
would make you much more of a security risk than him, today. Socialism
isn't illegal in the USA.

6. Your indignation is pretty selective. The slightest word about the
LIBERTY and your attitude is "cool it," but you got all kinds of
emotional currency to defend any criticism for this big time ****up.
Any one get killed? NOPE. 37 were murdered on the LIBERTY. Where's
your emotional response to that? Oh, could it be that for you politics
now trumps patriotism? That is probably an overstatement, but
sometimes you sound like that.

7. That bit about the Chinese and the FED. Your take is right up there
with Death Panals, India trip costs, Obama's birth certificate and a
dozen or so other Rightard mouth farts. You have no idea how much
forbearance you get on such nonsense compared to some others.

8. That is it for me. You get the last whack.

Dave

On Nov 6, 1:15*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
DaveS wrote:
Yep, Ken is skeptical and less than adulatory as to the US military.
And that gets old, ****es people off, me included, and gets a general
negative reaction. If you haven't noticed its not too popular an
attitude round here. It ****es me off about as much as his anti-Mormon
slurs.

The history of the US military and likewise the history of the
Latter Day Saints provides precious little which would lead me
to conclude they are deserving of adulation. The former is a
history of necessary evil and the latter a history of a racist
cult theocracy which became, for all practical purposes, the
state religion of Utah.

I am able to respect a persons service in the military but I
cannot respect the military. I can likewise respect a persons
right to worship any way they please without respecting the
cult in which they worship.

And I can respect your right to be ****ed off. You'll get
over it.

--
Ken Fortenberry

And you know zip about the LDS. Its a bigoted blind spot you got there
fellow, something you share with the radical evangelicals. When you
started on this jag you apparently believed they still practiced
polygamy. And you come from an area where extermination of Mormons was
officially sanctioned. Thats the shameful history.

Dave

what's o'bummer hiding & why?

DaveS wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
I am able to respect a persons service in the military but I
cannot respect the military. I can likewise respect a persons
right to worship any way they please without respecting the
cult in which they worship.

And I can respect your right to be ****ed off. You'll get
over it.

And you know zip about the LDS. Its a bigoted blind spot you got there
fellow, something you share with the radical evangelicals. When you
started on this jag you apparently believed they still practiced
polygamy. And you come from an area where extermination of Mormons was
officially sanctioned. Thats the shameful history.

I have never stated, implied or believed that the official
position of the current LDS allows polygamy. I am not privy
to all the cults secrets and I don't have a direct line to
god like the "prophet", but I do know that much. And there's
plenty of shameful history to go around.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Nov 7, 9:53*am, "~^ beancounter ~^" wrote:
what's o'bummer hiding & *why?

Moron.

g.

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 15:15:22 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

DaveS wrote:
Yep, Ken is skeptical and less than adulatory as to the US military.
And that gets old, ****es people off, me included, and gets a general
negative reaction. If you haven't noticed its not too popular an
attitude round here. It ****es me off about as much as his anti-Mormon
slurs.

The history of the US military and likewise the history of the
Latter Day Saints provides precious little which would lead me
to conclude they are deserving of adulation. The former is a
history of necessary evil and the latter a history of a racist
cult theocracy which became, for all practical purposes, the
state religion of Utah.

I am able to respect a persons service in the military but I
cannot respect the military. I can likewise respect a persons
right to worship any way they please without respecting the
cult in which they worship.

And I can respect your right to be ****ed off. You'll get
over it.

Reminds me of a little story...

It seems there were two little boys (or armies, if you prefer) circling each
other, about to duke it out. One was little Billy Smith. The Smiths were
extremely religious - Sunday school, Sunday service, day service, night service
- if the doors were unlocked, there were the Smiths, raising praise to their
deity. Boy howdy, were they respected in their town! Even folks of other
religions had to admit the Smiths were obviously devoutly religious. The other
boy was little Johnny Jones. These Jones' were not the ones with which the
folks in town wished to keep up, Oh, everyone said that while they weren't
_bad_ people, they couldn't be all that good because they never went to church
or gave any outward sides of having any particular religion. So, anyway, there
are little Billy and little Johnny, doing little-boy fight prep, with little
Billy asking his deity to smite the non-believer and little Johnny thinking
about what his parents might say about him fighting. Suddenly, little Billy
screamed, "I'm gonna whip yer atheist ass, you son of a bitch!," and took a
series of wild, awkward swings. Little Johnny took advantage of his opponent's
misplaced exuberance and without saying a word, beat the snot-slinging **** out
of little Billy. As he stepped back, little Johnny looked up to the skies and
said, "Um, God, excuse me, sir, but when you have a moment, please forgive
Johnny...he knows not what he does..."

And on a related note, if you two Apostles of St. Nitwit think that Seymour
Hersh is a credible journalist, you need and deserve a little more
religion...oh, to be sure, he knows how to get pseudoliberal wannabe
intellectuals whipped into a tizzy to further his "career," but as far as
providing a truly informative bit of journalism, not so much...

HTH,
R