Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 6 topics

Tuesday, August 8, 2017

Patrick Kehoe <pkehoe@telus.net>: Aug 08 10:28AM -0700

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 3:41:42 AM UTC-7, The Iceberg wrote:
> Eh! You Fedfans have been saying Nadal would retire "next year" cos of his "physical defensive" game since 2005!
 
Rafa on the verge of destruction...
 
FAKE NEWS!!
 
:))))))
 
P
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Aug 08 11:18AM -0500

On 8/5/2017 9:02 PM, TT wrote:
> emails were completely manufactured...
 
> Or, can you name a controversy arising from Podesta's emails without
> googling it up? You can't. Now THAT was a real 'nothingburger'.
 
... which makes it impossible that these "leaks" could have swung the
election, right?
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Aug 08 11:22AM -0500

On 8/5/2017 9:27 PM, bob wrote:
> knew she was running long ago and wanted to make sure she never
> slipped up and let her email in gov't control, not her own control.
> this is obvious stuff TT, c'mon.
 
Excellent synopsis. Hillary's ineptness was breathtaking at the State
Dept, and yet she thought she should be promoted to control the ship of
state?
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Aug 08 08:00PM +0300

stephenJ kirjoitti 8.8.2017 klo 19:18:
>> googling it up? You can't. Now THAT was a real 'nothingburger'.
 
> ... which makes it impossible that these "leaks" could have swung the
> election, right?
 
No. Despite being nothinburgers they were source for lots of negative
nonsense news.
 
Sort of like Benghazi.
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Aug 08 06:01PM +0100

On 08/08/2017 16:34, Carey wrote:
>> investigations concluded "we are expressing to Justice our view that no
>> charges are appropriate in this case", James B. Comey, July 5, 2016
 
> ...which is not an FBI statement that no laws were broken.
 
And I didn't claim it was. Nevertheless, no charges have been brought,
none are likely to be brought. What laws could have been broken?
 
The Federal Records Act (1950)
The Freedom of Information Act (1946/1966)
The National Records and Archives (NARA)
Section 1924 of Title 18 of the U.S. Crimes and
Criminal Procedure Code
 
The latter is here: <https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1924>
 
"U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 93 › § 1924
18 U.S. Code § 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified
documents or material"
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Aug 08 06:07PM +0100

On 08/08/2017 16:55, Carey wrote:
 
>> Who do you work for?
 
> Adding: What's your take on the Treeza and Arlene show, so far?
> Will the former still be PM in six months?
 
I'd say that it's highly likely she will. Changing leader/PM would not
be a good idea for the government nor the Conservative Party. Also,
there are no likely candidates to take over.
 
Arlene Foster has nothing to do with anything really, apart from the
NI Assembly.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Aug 08 06:15PM +0100

On 08/08/2017 17:15, TT wrote:
 
 
>> When I was employed I worked for the United Kingdom Atomic Energy
>> Authority (UKAEA)
 
> Sounds impressive.
 
Wasn't really that impressive, I wasn't a nuclear physicist or anything,
although when I joined I was in the Theoretical Physics Division. A
former head of that division had a certain notoriety:
 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klaus_Fuchs>
 
Long before my time, but he probably worked in the same building.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: Aug 08 10:19AM -0700

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 10:01:28 AM UTC-7, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
 
> > ...which is not an FBI statement that no laws were broken.
 
> And I didn't claim it was. Nevertheless, no charges have been brought,
> none are likely to be brought. What laws could have been broken?
 
Slippery.
 
 
> >> ---
> >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
The blizzard-of-text stuff is an interesting tactic.
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: Aug 08 10:22AM -0700

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 10:07:37 AM UTC-7, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
 
> I'd say that it's highly likely she will. Changing leader/PM would not
> be a good idea for the government nor the Conservative Party. Also,
> there are no likely candidates to take over.
 
Wasn't thinking of a Conservative. There's another guy who do come to mind, though.
 
> Arlene Foster has nothing to do with anything really, apart from the
> NI Assembly.
 
Is May's shaky government not being made tenable by DUP (Foster's) support?
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: Aug 08 08:22PM +0300

On 8.8.2017 19:12, TT wrote:
 
> Interesting tidbit end of the clip: Remember Peter Thiel who backed
> Trump, and Bob bragged about it... well now when he's asked to describe
> Trump administration with one word, the word is "incompetence". lol
 
Yeah. Bumped into that yesterday somewhere but forgot to post :(
 
:)
 
--
"Donald Trump is the weak man's vision of a strong man."
-- Charles Cooke
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Aug 09 02:19AM +1000

On 9/08/2017 1:14 AM, *skriptis wrote:
 
>> I complimented Fed on this shot back in 2008. You can look it up & then
>> come back & apologize to me.
 
> Why do you have to even say it? It's one of the best
 
I say it to help them realize there is something wrong with the way they
think about Roger. I think it's sinking in but they will never admit it
here.
 
 
> shots/momements ever in tennis but that match was one of the best
> ever, and it wouldn't have been, if it weren't for such moments
> from both players.
 
 
Yes, certainly one of the very best baseline battles ever in a huge
consequence final. I'd watch it again if there were more net play.
 
 
 
 
> Now they want to decide who can admire Federer's shots.
 
> Sick.
 
Yes there certainly is something very wrong with these Fedfuckers.
 
True tennis fans can admire great play from any player. Fedfuckers
always diss Rafa/Djoker. There is a world of difference between a
Federer fan & Fedfucker.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Aug 09 02:22AM +1000

On 9/08/2017 1:25 AM, AZ wrote:
 
> What is truly, utterly sick is harassing Fed fans for over a decade for saying remotely positive things about Fed and pretending after all that that nothing happened and changing tunes. Whimpy knows what he did and what he is doing and he thoroughly deserves this virtual busting of his nuts. The more he and you say fednuts, fedfuçķer or sick stuff like that, the more you are going to get it. :)
 
A true tennis/Fed fan will admire & acknowledge Federer, as well as
Rafa/Djoker/Murray/Stan etc. A Fedfucker only bows to Federer. Even you
have to acknowledge there's something very odd about that kind of
thinking no?
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Aug 08 05:32PM +0200


>> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
>> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
 
> What is truly, utterly sick is harassing Fed fans for over a decade for saying remotely positive things about Fed and pretending after all that that nothing happened and changing tunes. Whimpy knows what he did and what he is doing and he thoroughly deserves this virtual busting of his nuts. The more he and you say fednuts, fedfuç?er or sick stuff like that, the more you are going to get it. :)
 
 
The problem is most of fedfuckers are simply nuts/deranged.
 
E.g. Whisper saying Federer beating Baghdatis to win AO was a slam
title won against softcock opponent.
It's very much spot on, it's not even insulting to Federer, let
alone to his fans.
 
Yet fedfuckers get offended personally and start their tantrums.
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
AZ <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com>: Aug 08 09:23AM -0700

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 9:32:31 PM UTC+6, *skriptis wrote:
> --
 
> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
 
No. It's the deliberate omission of facts that is sleazy. Marcos Baghdatis beat second seeded Roddick, 4th seeded Nalbandian (who had just won YEC 2005 beating Fed) reach the final. He was a dangerous rising newcomer who upset the two highest seeds in his draw. He was not a softcock opponent at the moment. In fact, he defeated potentially Fed's two most dangerous opponents.
 
Forgetting this crucial contextual info is insulting to the memory of any tennis fan, let alone Fed fans. And then calling them by names is even more beyond the pale.
 
So fuçk off you too, you lying piece of ßhit.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Aug 09 02:27AM +1000

On 9/08/2017 1:32 AM, *skriptis wrote:
> It's very much spot on, it's not even insulting to Federer, let
> alone to his fans.
 
> Yet fedfuckers get offended personally and start their tantrums.
 
Exactly. Do I ever rave about Mac's win over Chris Lewis in Wimbledon
final? Or Pete's wins over Pioline? Never. Why would I? It's sad he
didn't get to play his toughest rivals. For Fedfuckers the last thing
they want is for Fed to play another great rival. They want Bagditis
types all day long.
 
Sure you want your fave to win the title, but if it's not against his
greatest rivals you should feel cheated, not euphoric.
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
AZ <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com>: Aug 08 09:28AM -0700

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 10:23:03 PM UTC+6, Whisper wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
When are you writing a doctoral thesis about your imaginary Fedfuçkers? Let us know so that we can use the copy as toilet paper.
AZ <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com>: Aug 08 09:31AM -0700

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 10:27:32 PM UTC+6, Whisper wrote:
 
> > Yet fedfuckers get offended personally and start their tantrums.
 
> Exactly. Do I ever rave about Mac's win over Chris Lewis in Wimbledon
> final? Or Pete's wins over Pioline? Never.
 
LMAO. Whimpy uploaded and posted hundreds of bh videos of Pete to prove a point. For months!! Lol the hypocrisy.
 
 
Why would I? It's sad he
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
Lol. Look, it's two trolls having some fun.
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Aug 08 04:40PM

On Wed, 09 Aug 2017 02:27:21 +1000, Whisper wrote:
 
> For Fedfuckers the last thing they want is for Fed to play another great
> rival. They want Bagditis types all day long.
 
You claimed Baggy was better than Fed on hard courts though.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Aug 08 06:51PM +0200

>> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
 
> No. It's the deliberate omission of facts that is sleazy. Marcos Baghdatis beat second seeded Roddick, 4th seeded Nalbandian (who had just won YEC 2005 beating Fed) reach the final. He was a dangerous rising newcomer who upset the two highest seeds in his draw. He was not a softcock opponent at the moment. In fact, he defeated potentially Fed's two most dangerous opponents.
 
> Forgetting this crucial contextual info is insulting to the memory of any tennis fan, let alone Fed fans. And then calling them by names is even more beyond the pale.
 
 
Fair enough, I guess you'll give Pipeline same treatment.
 
 
 
> So fuçk off you too, you lying piece of ßhit.
 
Pathetic.
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
AZ <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com>: Aug 08 10:15AM -0700

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 10:51:31 PM UTC+6, *skriptis wrote:
 
> > No. It's the deliberate omission of facts that is sleazy. Marcos Baghdatis beat second seeded Roddick, 4th seeded Nalbandian (who had just won YEC 2005 beating Fed) reach the final. He was a dangerous rising newcomer who upset the two highest seeds in his draw. He was not a softcock opponent at the moment. In fact, he defeated potentially Fed's two most dangerous opponents.
 
> > Forgetting this crucial contextual info is insulting to the memory of any tennis fan, let alone Fed fans. And then calling them by names is even more beyond the pale.
 
> Fair enough,
 
Damn right it is. What is bizarre is that you/Whimpy need this to be pointed out to you. Which means, a) you guys are incompetent tennis discussion participants who innocently forgot facts, or more likely b) you guys are trolling Fedfans while being totally aware of all the facts.
 
 
>I guess you'll give Pipeline same treatment.
 
Who the f cared about Pioline in the first place? If Whimpy wasn't bringing up Sampras so much and desperately finding and magnifying imaginary holes in Fed's résumé every single time with his weak era bullßhit, nobody would have brought up Pioline.
 
 
> > So fuçk off you too, you lying piece of ßhit.
 
> Pathetic.
 
Exactly my sentiment about this whole decade-long trolling charade.
 
 
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Aug 08 05:33PM +0200

> got 2 years from recreational coke use. There's no consistency
> whatsoever with severity of punishments on doping bans. The ones who
> come up with most nonsensical excuses are punished the least.
 
 
Yes. What's unusual there?
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
Patrick Kehoe <pkehoe@telus.net>: Aug 08 09:53AM -0700

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 6:51:31 AM UTC-7, Carey wrote:
> > Oh my gosh, her management team should be fired for coming up with that horrible excuse. Breast cancer medication made its way accidentally into the family meal? *rolls eyes*
 
> Yeah, that's up there with Gasquet's excuse.
 
> Hilarious
 
Gasquet's excuse was comic genius, I thought... out at a disco, drinking, dancing, having a wild time and making out with some cocaine-smacking lip-glossed party girl... absolute classic! :)
 
P
Patrick Kehoe <pkehoe@telus.net>: Aug 08 09:56AM -0700

On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 at 6:20:07 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
> Oh my gosh, her management team should be fired for coming up with that horrible excuse. Breast cancer medication made its way accidentally into the family meal? *rolls eyes*
 
No cook books involved in this boiler story, so there's that... old family recipe... :))
 
P
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Aug 08 08:01PM +0300

Patrick Kehoe kirjoitti 8.8.2017 klo 19:53:
 
>> Hilarious
 
> Gasquet's excuse was comic genius, I thought... out at a disco, drinking, dancing, having a wild time and making out with some cocaine-smacking lip-glossed party girl... absolute classic! :)
 
> P
 
What makes it even better is that the the guy is probably gay...
heyguys00@gmail.com: Aug 08 09:57AM -0700

On Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 8:50:34 AM UTC-4, bob wrote:
> related things can prevent someone from joining the military.
> eyesight, missing a limb, etc.
 
> bob
 
They only measurable reason Trump stated was health care costs. How about a new policy of anyone with health care costs over X amount gets kicked out? Apply it to everyone.
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.tennis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment