[Milsurplus] Hollywood and radio gear...

[Todd Bigelow - PS]

Mark Richards wrote:

>>Michael Moore is just the latest of the virulently
>>anti-American scum that populate that town.
>>    
>>
>
>Your remark begs for a reply.  I suspect you wanted one, or were perhaps
>looking for another fellow to slap you on the back with a "darn tootin!".
>  
>
As do yours, no doubt.

>Unfortunately for the argument, this "virulently anti-American" film film
>depicts the inspiring leader reading a book, about a goat (or whatever),
>while the attack roils on.  Had the reaction been more appropriate, as in an
>immediate "excuse me but I must attend to some important business", perhaps
>Moore would have little else to peddle.  I think any one of us would get up
>and go if someone whispered in our ear, "the nation is under attack".  Or,
>would we just sit there, and fiddle.
>
>The film may have its inaccuracies, if you've seen it, but starting off with
>the book reading scene does indeed set the stage.
>  
>

Typical misrepresentations from Uncle Joe's side of the aisle. My 
recollection is this: when the president was informed
of the first plane strike, the thought was that it was an accident, and 
he continued reading (to a classroom full of children,
something you conveniently leave out of the 'goat book' reference, no 
doubt in hopes of conjuring up Lil Abner images of
a leader you don't like). After the second impact took place, the 
president did indeed conclude his reading and, as I recall, gave a quick 
press conference from the school. So, what would you have had him do - 
jump up and scream "Oh my GOSH!  We're under ATTACK!!" and run screaming 
from the room?

 Moore's "innacuracies" as you call them go from misleading by obvious 
intent (using a clip of Pres. Bush while golfing referring to the 
'terrorists' to mean Al Qaeda as he continues with his golf game when he 
was actually speaking about the palestinian terrorist groups) to 
outright lying in his assertion that members of the bin Laden family 
were allowed to leave the country by air while US airspace was closed. 
Absolutely untrue, but Moore has never been one to let the truth get in 
the way of his personal agenda. No doubt you're okay with such 
"inaccuracies" - most others are not.

>Finally, is it anti-American to criticise; question; hold leaders
>accountable?  Please explain why.  That's a new one by me.  My last civics
>lesson was in 1972, but as I recall this is how the whole America thing
>started.
>  
>

Not at all, but where were you all when fmr. Pres. Clinton was lying to 
congress, the media, and the country in general? Despite
the fact that Congress did not impeach him doesn't somehow mean he was 
innocent. He was later disbarred by his home state and sued in civil 
court, yet the Rondstats, Baldwins, and Moores of the left coast still 
worship him as a god. Guess it shows pretty clearly that they aren't 
really concerned with what's best for the country, merely with their guy 
winning. At any cost, even the sacrifice of the truth. And before you 
get some idea to rant about Pres. Bush somehow lying about WMDs, keep in 
mind that his statements were based on intel from the UK, Russia, and 
others including the UN's own reports on Iraq's chemical weapons 
stockpile and nuclear programs, as well as US agencies cut to the bone 
and forbidden to use the proper assets to gather useful information. 
Something else conveniently left out in the Bush-bashing frenzy.

Sorry for the off-topic response folks, but this crap gets sickening. 
President Bush isn't perfect, but Clinton lied, Gore lost, Dean is done, 
and Kerry is scary. Deal with it.

And to Mac Macdonald - here's a slap on the back and a "darn tootin!".

de Todd/'Boomer'  KA1KAQ  (still looking for a # 236 connector for a 
GF-11 transmitter)