Digest for alt.sports.hockey.nhl.mtl-canadiens@googlegroups.com - 10 updates in 2 topics

Monday, April 30, 2018

Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Apr 30 03:32PM -0700

Au contraire, I think it is widely regarded as a deep draft for defensemen... BUT!... the key thing really is that despite having quite a large number of potential top-10 draft candidates on D, they all have a wart or drawback or two, and historically it's never as easy to project how D will develop compared to forwards.
 
Bouchard, Hughes, Boqvist, Dobson, and Smith are all viable top-10 pick candidates on D. But they aren't the Dahlin or Doughty/Hedman calibre of prospects that really scream "guaranteed top pair". Any of them *could be* a top pair D when all is said and done. But the thing is, you might get Hanifin, or Juolevi, or Haydn Fleury, or Ryan Murray or Griffin Reinhart, etc, with a top-10 pick on D as well. Which could be decent NHL defensemen, or not, but it almost seems like you can get your Carlson, Burns, Subban etc other top D falling out from later picks as well.
 
D are just tougher to project aside from the absolutely top top top guys like Dahlin apparently is.
 
So you know with Svechnikov or Zadina, you almost have to get a top-6 winger. Maybe better, but forwards tend to look at 18 something more closely like what they project to look at down the road. I can see how it's easier for the Habs to pick a F here at #3. The current consensus seems to say Svechnikov is the slam dunk #2 guy, which means the Habs are most likely looking at Zadina as #3. Some outside suggestion that Tkachuk sneaks in as the more gritty/rugged/character/attitude version of a top-6 winger instead.
 
There's probably going to be a top D coming out of the group too. Just nobody is going to be as confident in figuring out who that is.
 
l8r,
Gerry
Jim Bauch <j.bauch@ca.rr.com>: Apr 30 03:45PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 3:32:41 PM UTC-7, Gerry wrote:
> Some outside suggestion that Tkachuk sneaks in as the more gritty
 
Bergevin's ears perk up...
 
>/rugged
 
... eyes light up...
 
>/character
 
... tongue now hanging out...
 
>/attitude version of a top-6 winger instead.
 
... draft card already filled out.
 
(I have no idea whether that would be a good or bad pick, mind you.)
 
Also, looks like MB and Keith Tkachuk briefly overlapped in St. Louis.
 
Jim
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Apr 30 04:12PM -0700

Even with all that stuff, I don't think I could muster much complaint if they went Tkachuk. He's 6'3/200, I don't see a downside. His brother is right in there in every game I see the Flames, he seems to have a lot of the same traits. That throwback Power Forward type is a rare commodity these days too.
 
Frankly if anything I could imagine them being less able to screw up the development on him vs. a more pure skill guy?
 
l8r,
Gerry
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Apr 30 04:26PM -0700

Of course the other "cool idea" I read earlier was to trade the #3 to Buffalo for Ryan O'Reilly. Because O'Reilly - traditionally a character/2way/yada throwback darling type of player was a little too honest in a post game interview and Buffalo has to trade him for that or something, and hey, they actually are building with youth unlike the mysterious Habs. Eichel and Dahlin, Mittlestadt has come up, they could add another top winger with #3, and maybe that looks great for their program.
 
And voila, the Habs get their #1 center who check all the foxhole boxes right out of the gate. Still has a solid 5 years on his deal too.
 
This idea "makes sense" to me!
 
l8r,
Gerry
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Apr 30 06:29PM -0700

My bet is they grab a forward, unless they trade for a center or defenseman. I doubt they will use the 3rd to grab a defenceman who requires seasoning. Past Dahlin, not a lot of size. I have no faith they can take an average sized dman with an offensive upside and not simplify his offensive game skills out of him
Mike <mike@gmail.com>: Apr 30 02:16PM -0300

I really wonder about this guy. He is the first to complain that the
fans are out to lunch. So how do you explain this column?
 
http://montrealgazette.com/sports/jack-todd-finnish-centreman-jesperi-kotkaniemi-could-fill-a-big-hole-in-habs-lineup
 
Take the #3 spot and draft a guy rated 20th? What's he smoking? And
we're out to lunch?
TheMadApe <chiefape@gmail.com>: Apr 30 02:27PM -0300

Mike wrote:
 
> http://montrealgazette.com/sports/jack-todd-finnish-centreman-jesperi-kotkaniemi-could-fill-a-big-hole-in-habs-lineup
 
> Take the #3 spot and draft a guy rated 20th? What's he smoking? And
> we're out to lunch?
 
I read that too. Thought he must mean 2nd round...but nope.
 
Jack used to visit the NG. Wonder if he still does?
 
Splain yerself Jack. Are you his agent?
 
BTW Habs have four 2nd rounders and I hope they make wise use of them.
 
I would suspect that they will trade one or two between here and there.
 
Pick 35th, 38th (from Chicago - looks good now), 56 (from Toronto), 57
(from Washington - could of lost this one to Tampa if Sergachev didn't
play 40 games. He did because he is good!)
 
 
TMA
Mike <mike@gmail.com>: Apr 30 03:05PM -0300

On 2018-04-30 02:27 PM, TheMadApe wrote:
> (from Washington - could of lost this one to Tampa if Sergachev didn't
> play 40 games. He did because he is good!)
 
> TMA
Todd used to visit this NG? What was his username?
Jim Bauch <j.bauch@ca.rr.com>: Apr 30 02:35PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 11:05:39 AM UTC-7, Mike wrote:
> > play 40 games. He did because he is good!)
 
> > TMA
> Todd used to visit this NG? What was his username?
 
That's news to me. I wonder if Ape isn't confusing him with Dave Stubbs (formerly of the Gazette, now with NHL.com), who posted a couple of times and wrote an article about the group once.
 
Jim
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Apr 30 03:43PM -0700

Yeah, up at #3 it sure doesn't look like there's a sensible reach up there. But all those other picks ought to give them some good shots at solid C prospects.
 
I mean, Poehling and Evans are good C prospects, accumulated from later on. We were talking about STL prospects in trade scenarios like Thomas and yeah, good prospects can come from later in the draft too. Maybe the Habs have a package with some of those 2nds and can move up, maybe they can just take 4 kicks at the can, either way - I think it's realistic to think with all those extra picks they should get some good C prospect in there.
 
l8r,
Gerry
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 alt.sports.hockey.nhl.mtl-canadiens+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 7 topics

"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: May 01 12:02AM +0300

Not much talk about this. Come to think of it I just woke up to it
myself. But the clay season is already over, so ...
 
Rafa wins Tsitty 2 and 1. Yawn.
 
"I'm very happy for the victory against a very difficult opponent", said
Nadal. "Tsitsipas has an amazing future. It was a great final for me and
the 11th title here means a lot. I enjoyed the whole week and had great
support from the crowd".
 
Yawn.
 
--
https://img.aws.la-croix.com/2014/08/19/1193729/Comment-Herge-alle-pecher-jurons-favoris-capitaine-Haddock-pointe-Bretagne_1_730_425.jpg
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 01 12:28AM +0200

> the 11th title here means a lot. I enjoyed the whole week and had great
> support from the crowd".
 
> Yawn.
 
I agree it's become dull and it seems people how lost interest. So
far 11th title seems surreal.
 
But once he gets to 13, 14, or 15 people will be interested again.
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Apr 30 02:40PM -0700

On Monday, 30 April 2018 17:42:18 UTC+1, soccerfan777 wrote:
> Jimmy Connors (2–0)
> Mats Wilander (2–1)
 
> He lost 17 times to Becker/Edberg/Lendl/Wilander.
 
ABAHAHAHHAHHHAHHAHAHA! 6 consecutive years at Number 1! THEEEEE REAL GOAT record! he tricked everyone with the slam thing!!
MBDunc <michaelb@dnainternet.net>: Apr 30 02:57PM -0700

On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 12:40:11 AM UTC+3, The Iceberg wrote:
> > Mats Wilander (2–1)
 
> > He lost 17 times to Becker/Edberg/Lendl/Wilander.
 
> ABAHAHAHHAHHHAHHAHAHA! 6 consecutive years at Number 1! THEEEEE REAL GOAT record! he tricked everyone with the slam thing!!
 
I said already 2002 that Sampras' most superb record is 6 x year-end #1 in-a-row. Only Pancho can have similar claim.
 
.mikko
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 03:21PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 4:57:58 PM UTC-5, MBDunc wrote:
 
> > ABAHAHAHHAHHHAHHAHAHA! 6 consecutive years at Number 1! THEEEEE REAL GOAT record! he tricked everyone with the slam thing!!
 
> I said already 2002 that Sampras' most superb record is 6 x year-end #1 in-a-row. Only Pancho can have similar claim.
 
> .mikko
 
Except that Pancho was actually adjudged year #1 not through some wacko point system but by experts and he actually played a H2H tour against major professionals on the pro tour. So his Year end #1 is valid.
 
Sampras year-end #1 is as meaningful as someone finish #1 at the end of this month.
 
If you were to truly judge the best player of the year - Sampras was most likely not the best player in 1995 (Muster won 12 tournaments including the French and had a 83 % win loss much better than Sampras winning only 5 tournaments at 82% or Andre Agassi who won 7 at 89%). Its true Sampras won one more slam that year than Agassi and Muster that doesnt make his claim undisputed. I would put Muster at #1 and Agassi at #2 and Sampras only at #3 in 1995.
 
I would say he was the best in 1993 and 1994 and the weak 1997. Rest are all disputed. In 1998 Rios was much better.
 
So in essence Sampras was the best only in 1993, 1994 and the weak year 1997.
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: Apr 30 11:29PM +0300

Trump has until midnight to determine whether to extend steel and
aluminum tariff exemptions for a handful of nations. The exemptions
allow several US allies — including the European Union, Canada, and
Mexico — to avoid a 25% duty on exports of steel to the US and the 10%
duty on exports of aluminum.
 
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-steel-aluminum-tariff-exemptions-list-trade-war-2018-4?r=US&IR=T&IR=T
 
H ah ah a. Good luck Trump with the decision.
 
I've also been hearing the word "parts" lately. Meaning, Trump is
willing to shoot US businesses in the foot by taxing parts the US
manufacturers use in their end products. That would put them in an
uncompetitive position.
 
Oh, oh. Trump is an idiot.
 
--
https://img.aws.la-croix.com/2014/08/19/1193729/Comment-Herge-alle-pecher-jurons-favoris-capitaine-Haddock-pointe-Bretagne_1_730_425.jpg
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Apr 30 02:43PM -0700

On Monday, 30 April 2018 21:29:43 UTC+1, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
> manufacturers use in their end products. That would put them in an
> uncompetitive position.
 
> Oh, oh. Trump is an idiot.
 
yet that idiot THRASHED your Hillary and the Demorats! he gave her a real gooooood beating!
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: May 01 01:13AM +0300

On 1.5.2018 0:43, The Iceberg wrote:
>> uncompetitive position.
 
>> Oh, oh. Trump is an idiot.
 
> yet that idiot THRASHED your Hillary and the Demorats! he gave her a real gooooood beating!
 
Hillary was one pizza away from winning. A Comey pizza.
 
--
https://img.aws.la-croix.com/2014/08/19/1193729/Comment-Herge-alle-pecher-jurons-favoris-capitaine-Haddock-pointe-Bretagne_1_730_425.jpg
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 03:16PM -0700

On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 12:13:28 AM UTC+2, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
 
> >> Oh, oh. Trump is an idiot.
 
> > yet that idiot THRASHED your Hillary and the Demorats! he gave her a real gooooood beating!
 
> Hillary was one pizza away from winning. A Comey pizza. ...
 
Without Comey and Lynch Hillary would have been indicted in summer 2016 and Biden would be US President.
 
 
Max
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 01:23PM -0700

In 1999 Steffi was 2-2 H2H against Venus Williams and 1-1 H2H against Serena Williams. The most important match, though, was when she beat Venus in the Wimbledon quarters (Venus would win Wimbledon in 2000 and 2001).
 
More important however is that Steffi OVERTOOK both sisters in the WTA rankings. When she retired on August 13th that year she was ranked at #3. Venus was #4 and Serena #9.
 
 
But who was closer to their peak - Steffi or the Willies?
 
1) Steffi in 1999 had her worst winning percentage that years since 1985. She had only 3 worse seasons than 1999. Extremely below-average.
 
2) Venus in 1999 had the 7th-best (!) winning percentage in her long, long career. Clearly above average.
 
3) Serena in 1999 had the 3rd-best (!) winning percentage in the 1997-2009 time frame. Clearly above average.
 
So we can conclude:
Extremely below-average Steffi was better than clearly-above-average Serena and Venus.
 
 
Patriotic US tennis fans won't like that and are set to come up with excuses.
Maybe racism?
 
Lol
 
 
Max
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 01:50PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 3:23:27 PM UTC-5, Calimero wrote:
 
> 3) Serena in 1999 had the 3rd-best (!) winning percentage in the 1997-2009 time frame. Clearly above average.
 
> So we can conclude:
> Extremely below-average Steffi was better than clearly-above-average Serena and Venus.
 
Its very clear and need not be explained. Any one who thinks Venus is better is out of his mind. Anyone who thinks Serena is better is just a CEIBS fucker.
 
 
> Patriotic US tennis fans won't like that and are set to come up with excuses.
> Maybe racism?
 
Its called reverse-racism.
 
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Apr 30 03:15PM -0700

On Monday, 30 April 2018 21:50:50 UTC+1, soccerfan777 wrote:
 
> > Patriotic US tennis fans won't like that and are set to come up with excuses.
> > Maybe racism?
 
> Its called reverse-racism.
 
wow! so you can be a "reverse" racist!
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 03:15PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 10:50:50 PM UTC+2, soccerfan777 wrote:
 
> > Patriotic US tennis fans won't like that and are set to come up with excuses.
> > Maybe racism?
 
> Its called reverse-racism.
 
 
Yes, right-wingers like Bob and Steve Jaros clearly have a bad conscience because their ancestors probably were slave holders or have lynched several poor black men. And now they try to make good for this by zealous support for the not very likable Serena Williams. Who is a US national, which is another plus. So they can combine their bad conscience with good old nationalism. A win-win situation for them.
 
 
Max
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Apr 30 02:44PM -0700

On Monday, 30 April 2018 11:45:02 UTC+1, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
 
> Then again, Peter Thiel, a Trumpist and Trump's friend, thinks democracy
> is a nuisance. Likely Trump too, just can't say it out loud. Maybe you
> should move into that direction also.
 
well yes but you're the same as the Bolsheviks and it's good you're dumb enough to admit it.
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 03:08PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 3:49:33 AM UTC+2, bob wrote:
 
> and for max:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_Nazi_Germany
 
> bob
 
 
 
What is wrong with fossil energy, you tree-hugging wimp?
 
 
Max
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: Apr 30 11:14PM +0300

President Donald Trump hasn't been shy about taking credit for the stock
market's rise. And since prices started falling from their highs of last
December, he has largely been silent. But now he's taking some
ownership, saying he is doing something that "bothers the market."
 
This past weekend during a rally in Washington, Michigan, Trump touted
tax cuts, job creation and the 35% jump in the stock market since the
election.
 
"The stock market, which is not really the all-time indicator, because
the country is actually doing much better than the stock market," he
said to thousands of supporters. "It would've been up 60%, but I have to
do things. I can't let other countries take advantage of us, so we're
doing trade deals."
 
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-stock-market-wouldve-60-things-175707650.html?guccounter=1
 
Ha hah ha ha ha ha ha hah a. "I have to do things".
 
Isn't this what I've been saying for a few times alreddy. The thing is,
which would a rational investor prefer? The 60% or "doing things".
 
Ha ha ha ha ha.
 
No wonder the bankers like bob, Calimero and Jaros don't like to talk
about this. Not forgetting the biggest banker of them all, Iceberg.
 
--
https://img.aws.la-croix.com/2014/08/19/1193729/Comment-Herge-alle-pecher-jurons-favoris-capitaine-Haddock-pointe-Bretagne_1_730_425.jpg
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 01:28PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 10:14:36 PM UTC+2, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
> President Donald Trump hasn't been shy about taking credit for the stock
> market's rise.
 
 
1) The highest Dow Jones during the Obama regime was about 18,300 points. Now it is above 24,000.
 
2) Obama allowed Little Rocket Man to develop his nuclear arsenal. Trump is set to solve this problem.
 
3) Obama set a "red line" to Assad and cowardly didn't do anything when he used chemical weapons. Trump bombed him.
 
 
Trump is a orange clown. But still far, far better than the dangerous amateur before him in the WH.
 
 
 
Max
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: Apr 30 11:35PM +0300

On 30.4.2018 23:28, Calimero wrote:
>> President Donald Trump hasn't been shy about taking credit for the stock
>> market's rise.
 
> 1) The highest Dow Jones during the Obama regime was about 18,300 points. Now it is above 24,000.
 
Didn't you read what your idol said. "Without my dropping of the ball,
it would have been 60% higher".
 
Ha ha ha ha ha. He's right. I've said this already a couple of times.
Since when don't bankers like profits?
 
> 2) Obama allowed Little Rocket Man to develop his nuclear arsenal. Trump is set to solve this problem.
 
Let's see how this pans out.
 
> 3) Obama set a "red line" to Assad and cowardly didn't do anything when he used chemical weapons. Trump bombed him.
 
This true. The biggest Obama blunder. In his case an understandable
blunder though.
 
--
https://img.aws.la-croix.com/2014/08/19/1193729/Comment-Herge-alle-pecher-jurons-favoris-capitaine-Haddock-pointe-Bretagne_1_730_425.jpg
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 02:06PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 10:35:17 PM UTC+2, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
 
> > 1) The highest Dow Jones during the Obama regime was about 18,300 points. Now it is above 24,000.
 
> Didn't you read what your idol said. "Without my dropping of the ball,
> it would have been 60% higher".
 
What dropping the ball?
Trump tried to get better trade deals. I don't agree 100 % with that policy. But he is consistent and he has a point at least towards China. So what if the market get a little bit jittery?
 
> Ha ha ha ha ha. He's right. I've said this already a couple of times.
> Since when don't bankers like profits?
 
If you think bankers make only profit in a bull market you are more naive than I thought.
 
> > 2) Obama allowed Little Rocket Man to develop his nuclear arsenal. Trump is set to solve this problem.
 
> Let's see how this pans out.
 
Your head will explode if the orange clown has success in this.
 
 
> > 3) Obama set a "red line" to Assad and cowardly didn't do anything when he used chemical weapons. Trump bombed him.
 
> This true. The biggest Obama blunder. In his case an understandable
> blunder though.
 
Yes, he is an appeaser by heart in foreign policy.
 
> --
> https://img.aws.la-croix.com/2014/08/19/1193729/Comment-Herge-alle-pecher-jurons-favoris-capitaine-Haddock-pointe-Bretagne_1_730_425.jpg
 
 
Max
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: May 01 12:25AM +0300

On 1.5.2018 0:06, Calimero wrote:
 
>> Didn't you read what your idol said. "Without my dropping of the
>> ball, it would have been 60% higher".
 
> What dropping the ball?
 
By saying what he said, he admitted that he screwed up! Ha ha ah ha.
 
> Trump tried to get better trade deals.
 
By doing what? Threatening people? EU, China have already announced
countermoves. Let's see what Trump's final decision is.
 
> I don't agree 100 % with that
> policy. But he is consistent and he has a point at least towards
> China. So what if the market get a little bit jittery?
 
So what if world trade shrinks as a consequence? That's what a jittery
market is waiting. Bankers ...
 
>> times. Since when don't bankers like profits?
 
> If you think bankers make only profit in a bull market you are more
> naive than I thought.
 
Haven't seen you announcing the Dow going down. "Yay, I'm making a
profit today!"
 
>>> arsenal. Trump is set to solve this problem.
 
>> Let's see how this pans out.
 
> Your head will explode if the orange clown has success in this.
 
I already have a few excuses brewing.
 
 
>> This true. The biggest Obama blunder. In his case an
>> understandable blunder though.
 
> Yes, he is an appeaser by heart in foreign policy.
 
Can't blame him. After all he *was* the appeaser. OTOH, Trump the ball
sweat guy telegraphed his drop shots for the exact same reason. He
didn't want a conflict with the Russkies.
 
Ha hah ah ha.
 
--
https://img.aws.la-croix.com/2014/08/19/1193729/Comment-Herge-alle-pecher-jurons-favoris-capitaine-Haddock-pointe-Bretagne_1_730_425.jpg
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 02:40PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 11:26:03 PM UTC+2, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
> >> ball, it would have been 60% higher".
 
> > What dropping the ball?
 
> By saying what he said, he admitted that he screwed up!
 
 
He didn't do that.
 
 
> > Trump tried to get better trade deals.
 
> By doing what? Threatening people? EU, China have already announced
> countermoves. Let's see what Trump's final decision is.
 
 
Let's see whether the Chinaman will blink, son ...
 
> > China. So what if the market get a little bit jittery?
 
> So what if world trade shrinks as a consequence? That's what a jittery
> market is waiting. Bankers ...
 
 
The Chinese and the Europeans are not interesting in shrinking trade, dummy.
So they will give in - a little bit. And the orange clown will declare victory.
 
> > naive than I thought.
 
> Haven't seen you announcing the Dow going down. "Yay, I'm making a
> profit today!"
 
The profit of banks don't hinge on short-term market developments. Especially not our "bank".
 
 
 
> >> Let's see how this pans out.
 
> > Your head will explode if the orange clown has success in this.
 
> I already have a few excuses brewing.
 
Yes, Obama paved the way (same as with unemployment and Dow surge). And the liberal Moon achieved the break-trough with his charm ...
 
> >> understandable blunder though.
 
> > Yes, he is an appeaser by heart in foreign policy.
 
> Can't blame him. After all he *was* the appeaser.
 
 
 
Max
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Apr 30 02:48PM -0700

On Monday, 30 April 2018 22:26:03 UTC+1, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
 
> > Trump tried to get better trade deals.
 
> By doing what? Threatening people? EU, China have already announced
> countermoves. Let's see what Trump's final decision is.
 
you really have no idea about economics do you, China is massively in debt and Trump knows all about it, which you clearly don't.

> > China. So what if the market get a little bit jittery?
 
> So what if world trade shrinks as a consequence? That's what a jittery
> market is waiting. Bankers ...
 
oh no are you one of those perpetual Marxist students?! LOL
 
> sweat guy telegraphed his drop shots for the exact same reason. He
> didn't want a conflict with the Russkies.
 
> Ha hah ah ha.
 
yes cos nobody sensible wants a pointless war with Russia, except anti-West morons like you and hilarious Hillary! if Russia can just take over Sweden that would be good though.
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: May 01 01:04AM +0300

On 1.5.2018 0:40, Calimero wrote:
 
>>> What dropping the ball?
 
>> By saying what he said, he admitted that he screwed up!
 
> He didn't do that.
 
"It would've been up 60%, but I have to do things".
 
 
>> By doing what? Threatening people? EU, China have already
>> announced countermoves. Let's see what Trump's final decision is.
 
> Let's see whether the Chinaman will blink, son ...
 
The Paper Tiger has a history of blinking.
 
>> jittery market is waiting. Bankers ...
 
> The Chinese and the Europeans are not interesting in shrinking trade,
> dummy.
 
Nobody is. The reason the market is jittery, despite the world economy
still being strong, is that it sees unpleasant things having a good
probability. All the unpleasant things can be traced to Mr T. One of
them is shrinking world trade.
 
And the RST bankers are defending these unpleasant things ... strange
bankers.
 
> So they will give in - a little bit. And the orange clown
> will declare victory.
 
The first move is Trump's. That will come today.
 
>> profit today!"
 
> The profit of banks don't hinge on short-term market developments.
> Especially not our "bank".
 
That's why it's stupid for a banker to celebrate daily increases in the
Dow in RST.
 
 
>> I already have a few excuses brewing.
 
> Yes, Obama paved the way (same as with unemployment and Dow surge).
> And the liberal Moon achieved the break-trough with his charm ...
 
Indeed.
 
>>>> understandable blunder though.
 
>>> Yes, he is an appeaser by heart in foreign policy.
 
>> Can't blame him. After all he *was* the appeaser.
 
And Trump the *real* pussy.
 
--
https://img.aws.la-croix.com/2014/08/19/1193729/Comment-Herge-alle-pecher-jurons-favoris-capitaine-Haddock-pointe-Bretagne_1_730_425.jpg
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Apr 30 02:42PM -0700

On Monday, 30 April 2018 18:18:55 UTC+1, Calimero wrote:
 
> > good idea would be to send Patrick in as he good with kind words!
 
> You are completely wrong..
> I'm no German nationalist and the Brits wouldn't be ruled by Germans if they stay in the EU. Why do you make yourself smaller than you are?
 
yeah! you no German nationalist, you just support Germany in everything, support a German football team, your fave politician is Angela Merkeler, are a massive fan of a German tennis player and love the EUSSR which is totally dominated/run by Germany.
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 03:01PM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 11:42:34 PM UTC+2, The Iceberg wrote:
 
> > You are completely wrong..
> > I'm no German nationalist and the Brits wouldn't be ruled by Germans if they stay in the EU. Why do you make yourself smaller than you are?
 
> yeah! you no German nationalist, you just support Germany in everything,
 
I don't.
 
> support a German football team,
 
I support a German football team in the Bundesliga, yes. Because the Bundesliga is our national league and only German team play there.
However I don't support our national team.
 
> your fave politician is Angela Merkeler,
 
My favorite politicians of all time are Reagan, Thatcher, George W. Bush, Condi Rice.
 
> are a massive fan of a German tennis player
 
I would even be a huge Steffi fan if she were British or Russian.
 
> and love the EUSSR which is totally dominated/run by Germany.
 
The EU is great, responsible for much of the economic progress in the last 30 years (in the UK, too!) and you are a fearful little Brit who underestimates the influence the UK wielded and could wield in the future.
Why the hell would the UK, France, Italy and Spain not want to run the EU together with Germany? Why always this inferiority complex towards Germans? What wimps you and your Brexiteer comrades are!
 
 
Max
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.

Sažetak za hr.rec.sport.nogomet@googlegroups.com - Broj ažuriranja: 4 u Broj tema: 2

branko 10 <branko@ck.t-com.hr>: Apr 30 12:32AM +0200

Deportivo - Barcelona 2-4
Sažetak (HD)
https://vk.com/video482277945_456239082
branko 10 <branko@ck.t-com.hr>: Apr 30 08:30AM +0200

Deportivo - Barcelona 2-4
Golovi, uživo (HD)
https://vk.com/video482277945_456239083
Sažetak (HD)
https://vk.com/video482277945_45623908282
branko 10 <branko@ck.t-com.hr>: Apr 30 09:07AM +0200

30.4.2018. u 8:30, branko 10 je napisao/la:
> https://vk.com/video482277945_456239083
> Sažetak (HD)
> https://vk.com/video482277945_45623908282
 
Deportivo - Barcelona 2-4
Golovi, uživo (HD)
https://vk.com/video482277945_456239083
Sažetak (HD)
https://vk.com/video482277945_456239082
branko 10 <branko@ck.t-com.hr>: Apr 30 12:07AM +0200

Slaven Belupo - Hajduk 0-0
Sažetak (Full HD)
https://vk.com/video482277945_456239080
Primili ste ovaj sažetak jer ste se pretplatili na ažuriranja te grupe. Postavke možete promijeniti na stranici članstva u grupi.
Da biste odjavili pretplatu na ovu grupu i prestali primati njezine e-poruke, pošaljite e-poruku na adresu hr.rec.sport.nogomet+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

Digest for rec.sport.football.college@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 12 topics

michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com>: Apr 30 10:57AM -0700

right now it looks between 5/2(bet 2 to win 5) and 11/4 depending on which online book you prefer.
 
Looking at their roster going into this year and a much improved qb situation, and one cannot help but think this is a GREAT value.
 
Sure they are still the best odds by a lot and nobody else is even close, but how could you take the field in this situation looking at Alabama's entire picture going into next year. Anything more than 1/1 payout for this is insane...
darkstar7646@gmail.com: Apr 30 11:14AM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 10:57:07 AM UTC-7, michael anderson wrote:
> right now it looks between 5/2(bet 2 to win 5) and 11/4 depending on which online book you prefer.
 
> Looking at their roster going into this year and a much improved qb situation, and one cannot help but think this is a GREAT value.
 
> Sure they are still the best odds by a lot and nobody else is even close, but how could you take the field in this situation looking at Alabama's entire picture going into next year. Anything more than 1/1 payout for this is insane...
 
+250 - + 275 is insane.
 
I mean, EVERYBODY thought the Patriots were walking last NFL season -- by August, it was + 280 - + 300 at the best in most Vegas books.
 
Mia, please admit to us that you believe there is abjectly no point in playing college football competitively, that Alabama is to win every championship. It'll make your life far easier to say that and be done with it.
 
Mike
The NOTBCS Guy <don.p.del.grande@gmail.com>: Apr 30 12:14PM -0700

By itself, I'd think about it...but this sounds like an excellent hedge opportunity, as you have to assume with those numbers that Alabama would be favored in the CFP Championship Game (which I assume is the online books' definition of the college football national champion), so you follow up the bet with some heavy cash on the money line against them in that game.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com>: Apr 30 01:00PM -0700

You should bet everything you have.
 
Borrow money.
Ken Olson <kolson@freedomnet.org>: Apr 30 04:16PM -0400

> You should bet everything you have.
 
> Borrow money.
 
Bet your house and your share of the car lot.
 
--
We're going to fight racism not with racism, but we're going to fight
with solidarity.
Fred Hampton
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com>: Apr 30 01:00PM -0700

Isn't he part of the Lardashians?
 
Idiocracy.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com>: Apr 30 12:59PM -0700

When I email my colleagues I get ooo messages by the dozen.
 
A hassle.
 
When I'm at home I can walk down to the pond at lunch and reel in a 2lb bass.
 
A perk.
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Apr 30 04:37AM -0700

https://twitter.com/brucelevin8/status/990423194392825856?s=21
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>: Apr 30 12:33PM -0700

In article <28bef849-b9e5-4554-86c5-ad045ebbac8a@googlegroups.com>,
 
> https://twitter.com/brucelevin8/status/990423194392825856?s=21
 
What is the message at that site?
 
--
Michael Press
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Apr 30 10:24AM -0700

On Sunday, April 29, 2018 at 7:20:02 PM UTC-4, Michael Press wrote:
 
 
> "Note to April Ryan. Sarah Sanders finally made you that pecan pie
> you wanted. Um, I wouldn't eat it if I were you. And not just
> because you could stand to lose 50 pounds.
 
Well that should put to rest any wingnut whining that some speaker at the same event attacked Sarah Sanders for her appearance.
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>: Apr 30 12:32PM -0700

In article <1f0f3760-d2ca-4421-9cf3-7e6c4714679e@googlegroups.com>,
> > you wanted. Um, I wouldn't eat it if I were you. And not just
> > because you could stand to lose 50 pounds.
 
> Well that should put to rest any wingnut whining that some speaker at the same event attacked Sarah Sanders for her appearance.
 
"Is Wolf Blitzer here? Everyone thinks he is dumb because he lost
on Jeopardy, baby. But he is so proud of himself. Last week he
completed that puzzle he was working on in a month's time. The box
said two to four years.
 
"Right now, Chris Cuomo is going, 'I don't get that joke.' That's
because he's still working on the puzzle. Spoiler alert, the block
shaped like a triangle goes in the three-sided hole.
 
--
Michael Press
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Apr 30 10:29AM -0700

https://www.southbendtribune.com/news/local/honeywell-plans-to-cut-healthcare-for-retirees/article_c2073496-8eb0-5b78-b31b-4ada25d18201.html
 
Blue collar jobs moving overseas? Check.
Old white people from the heartland screwed over? Check.
 
MAGA!!!11!
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com>: Apr 30 11:06AM -0700

I've been conditioned the past several years to respond to this with, "The previous administration blah, blah, blah..."
darkstar7646@gmail.com: Apr 30 11:15AM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 10:29:48 AM UTC-7, xyzzy wrote:
 
> Blue collar jobs moving overseas? Check.
> Old white people from the heartland screwed over? Check.
 
> MAGA!!!11!
 
Population reduction, The Republican (Final) Solution.
 
Miek
The NOTBCS Guy <don.p.del.grande@gmail.com>: Apr 30 12:16PM -0700

darkstarr wrote:
 
> Population reduction, The Republican (Final) Solution.
 
Cue the "It's also the Democratic solution - they just call it 'birth control'" types in three, two, one,...
Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan): Apr 30 12:08PM

On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 18:38:29 -0700 (PDT), JGibson
 
>> Ho-hum.....
 
>> look for 4-5 more next year after another national title.
 
>Whoever coaches that team without going undefeated must suck.
 
You must be a PhD - Perpetual Human Dick.
 
I hope we never run out of anti-Bama fans.
 
Hugh
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com>: Apr 30 05:11AM -0700

As long as there are bama fans, there will be anti bama fans.
Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan): Apr 30 03:45PM

On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 05:11:36 -0700 (PDT), "the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com"
 
>As long as there are bama fans, there will be anti bama fans.
 
I could not hope for more.
 
Hugh
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com>: Apr 30 11:11AM -0700

The rest of us do.
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Apr 30 06:27AM -0700

> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/upper-west-side-parents-angrily-rant-against-plan-to-bring-more-black-kids-to-their-schools/vi-AAwlb5w
 
Proud tradition going back to the Boston busing riots of the 1970s
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com>: Apr 30 11:07AM -0700

Yeah, but nobody wants the Irish in the neighborhood.
Some dued <theodoreward@gmail.com>: Apr 30 10:18AM -0700

http://www.newsweek.com/man-jailed-malaysias-first-fake-news-conviction-after-criticizing-police-906052
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Apr 30 10:03AM -0700

On Sunday, April 29, 2018 at 2:11:09 AM UTC-5, Damon Hynes, Cyclone Ranger wrote:
> :-)
 
+1 He'll have a nice career in the NFL
Futbol Phan <sgzphd@gmail.com>: Apr 30 09:44AM -0700

On Saturday, April 28, 2018 at 5:51:59 AM UTC-5, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
 
> > 2 teachers
 
> Teachers unions are always trying to obfuscate research that shows that
> class size has little to do with K-12 educational attainment.
 
Oh please do tell-- what research shows that class size is irrelevant?
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Apr 30 04:31AM -0700

I think all gear headed straight men have a thing for Sabine. She's pretty awesome.
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.football.college+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 15 updates in 5 topics

soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 08:47AM -0700

On Sunday, April 29, 2018 at 4:27:18 PM UTC-5, *skriptis wrote:
 
> Imbecile how is his slam count "inflated" when he won less slams
> per year in that "clown era" than he was winning before that, in
> an era you'd describe as much "stronger"?
 
He won many slams in the 1996-2002 period he shouldn't have won if not for the clown era (Agassi gone between 1996-98, Edberg gone, Becker gone, Courier gone and the likes of Stich/Krajicek being not consistent enough even at Wimbledon).
Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: Apr 30 09:27AM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 11:47:26 AM UTC-4, soccerfan777 wrote:
> > per year in that "clown era" than he was winning before that, in
> > an era you'd describe as much "stronger"?
 
> He won many slams in the 1996-2002 period he shouldn't have won if not for the clown era (Agassi gone between 1996-98, Edberg gone, Becker gone, Courier gone and the likes of Stich/Krajicek being not consistent enough even at Wimbledon).
 
He beat Chang, Pioline!! LOL
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 09:34AM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 11:27:40 AM UTC-5, Guypers wrote:
> > > an era you'd describe as much "stronger"?
 
> > He won many slams in the 1996-2002 period he shouldn't have won if not for the clown era (Agassi gone between 1996-98, Edberg gone, Becker gone, Courier gone and the likes of Stich/Krajicek being not consistent enough even at Wimbledon).
 
> He beat Chang, Pioline!! LOL
 
Chang was #2 in 1997, wasn't he? LOL Goran Ivanisevic was 3rd that year... hehe
 
Anyone who is #1 with 78% win-loss for the entire year cannot be taken seriously.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Apr 30 06:55PM +0200

>> per year in that "clown era" than he was winning before that, in
>> an era you'd describe as much "stronger"?
 
> He won many slams in the 1996-2002 period he shouldn't have won if not for the clown era (Agassi gone between 1996-98, Edberg gone, Becker gone, Courier gone and the likes of Stich/Krajicek being not consistent enough even at Wimbledon).
 
 
So Sampras was good enough to win 2 slams per year in an era of
Becker, Edberg, Courier, Agassi, but should not have won 1 slam
per year in an era with those greats missing, according to you?

 
Does that make any sense?
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Apr 30 07:00PM +0200


>> > He won many slams in the 1996-2002 period he shouldn't have won if not for the clown era (Agassi gone between 1996-98, Edberg gone, Becker gone, Courier gone and the likes of Stich/Krajicek being not consistent enough even at Wimbledon).
 
>> He beat Chang, Pioline!! LOL
 
> Chang was #2 in 1997, wasn't he? LOL Goran Ivanisevic was 3rd that year... hehe
 
 
Ljubicic was #3 behind Federer and Nadal, you remember that?
 
Ivanisevic has 27 pts in mpoat ranking.
Ljubicic 3 pts.
Tomic 1 pt.
 
And you laugh at Ivanisevic, 4-time Wim finalist being #3? He was
#2 before that as well.
 
 
 
> Anyone who is #1 with 78% win-loss for the entire year cannot be taken seriously.
 
 
If no one was able to win more than that, it surely means it was a
specific era, perhaps tougher for some unknown reason.

 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 11:01AM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 11:55:47 AM UTC-5, *skriptis wrote:
 
> So Sampras was good enough to win 2 slams per year in an era of
> Becker, Edberg, Courier, Agassi, but should not have won 1 slam
> per year in an era with those greats missing, according to you?
 
Yes because he himself had declined! Sampras of 1993-1995 was far better than Sampras of 1996-2002. And even the Sampras of 1993-1995 was not as dominant as peak Federer, Nadal, Djoker, Borg, Connors, Lendl and McEnroe.
 
 
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 11:02AM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 12:00:13 PM UTC-5, *skriptis wrote:
 
> --
 
> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
 
WTF is MPOAT and who gives a shit!
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 10:18AM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 11:25:17 AM UTC+2, The Iceberg wrote:
> 4) he a proud German Nationalist and so very pro-EUSSR cos he knows Germany runs/dominates the entire thing and is annoyed at Brexit as he can't understand why any nation wouldn't want to be ruled by the Germans.
> 5) he is a bit bored with exploiting/stealing from poor people and wants bigger challenges and the USA is a big country!
 
> good idea would be to send Patrick in as he good with kind words!
 
 
You are completely wrong..
I'm no German nationalist and the Brits wouldn't be ruled by Germans if they stay in the EU. Why do you make yourself smaller than you are?
 
 
Max
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 09:00AM -0700

On Friday, April 27, 2018 at 8:26:39 PM UTC-5, Whisper wrote:
> > calendar slams on the table.
 
> Also Serena failed to enter 2002 AO so maybe that was her big chance to
> do it? Might have calmed her nerves in 20015 for a 2nd GS? Coulda/woulda.
 
You do know that 2002 was notoriously weak? Hingis skipped 2 slams and hardly played and would retire at the end of the year, Davenport was injured and skipped the first three slams. And Mary Pierce was having an extremely lousy year. Apart from Venus there was no one except Capriati.
 
Look at the top 10
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_WTA_Tour#Rankings
 
 
Capriati finished the year 3rd and she won only 1 title which was the AO. So she basically flaked out immediately after the AO, just like Hingis.
 
And since AO 2002 final was between Hingis and Capriati, I see seriously doubt Serena would have beaten either at AO that year.
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 09:48AM -0700

On Friday, April 27, 2018 at 8:11:13 PM UTC-5, Whisper wrote:
 
> Nadal is the only man to ever do it (2010).
 
> Graf also failed to enter AO in 1995 & 1996, so most likely left 2 more
> calendar slams on the table.
 
Since Graf so comprehensively won AO 1994, she would have been favorite in 1995 and also 1996. Who would have stopped her there? Perhaps Seles in 1996? What about 1995?
 
 
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 09:51AM -0700

On Friday, April 27, 2018 at 5:40:26 AM UTC-5, Whisper wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
Borg was incredible no doubt about it. But no men was as versatile as Lenglen and Graf (won FO/Wim at least six times each) or Moody (won FO/Wim at least four times each). Moody played FO only 4 times or else she would have won more.
Calimero <calimero377@gmx.de>: Apr 30 10:09AM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 6:51:15 PM UTC+2, soccerfan777 wrote:
> > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > http://www.avg.com
 
> Borg was incredible no doubt about it. But no men was as versatile as Lenglen and Graf (won FO/Wim at least six times each) or Moody (won FO/Wim at least four times each). Moody played FO only 4 times or else she would have won more.
 
 
Graf won FO 88, Wim 88, USO 88.
And FO 93, Wim 93, USO 93.
And FO 95, Wim 95, USO 95.
And FO 96, Wim 96, USO 96.
 
4 times 3 slams within 4 months on 3 different surfaces.
 
Isn't that woman simply FANTASTIC?
 
 
Max
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Apr 30 06:48PM +0200


>> The point is Gandhi was a nationalist,
 
> And the point is you are wrong. Gandhi spent 21 years in South Africa and was fluent in English. He thought non-violence was the best way of achieving freedom. He was a great visionary.
 
 
What does fluency have to do with anything? Yeah and in his time
in south Africa?
 
https://thewire.in/history/gandhi-and-africans
 
Yet you have no shame criticizing Trump, who never said such stuff?
Are you a troll?
 
 
 
> He respected all religions and was tolerant to all cultures. He considered Hindus, Muslims and Christians his brothers. He didn't even hate the English. He just wanted them to free India.
 
 
He was a nationalist and a patriot but both kinda wise, realising
British were too powerful, and also somewhat of a chicken so he
didn't led the armed insurgency like Mao Tse-Tung, Castro, or
Tito. He wasn't alpha, but ok.
 
And it's stupid to consider Hindus, Christians and Muslims as
brothers. If we're all the same, and you like everyone the same,
do you really even love the ones that are close to you? How do
you love your own, if you love everyone the same?
 
If you like all the colors the same, then what's your favorite color?
 
That's a very important philosophical question.
 
 
 
 
> He loved the minorities. He wanted to eliminate castism. He has a hardcore liberal.
 
So is Trump.
 
 
> Trump OTOH is intolerant of other cultures and religion. He hates Muslims and minorities. And is not a liberal by any means.
 
Trump married two Slavic non-American women and also gave his
daughter to a Jew and signed a maga hat to Kanye West. How is
that intolerant to minorities?
 
I think his personal life demonstrates more openness than yours,
living in USA but ordering a wife from back home.

 
 
As for the ridiculous travel ban, it's not a Muslim thing. It's
identity politics Hillary/Obama brainwashing that confuses you.

 
It's math, just as with police profiling. If certain demographics
are statistically more likely to commit crimes, it's your duty to
address the issue, not to pretend that all of them pose the same
risk, and that e.g. Japanese guy is as likely to blow himself up
as is a Muslim guy.
 
Aren't you some kind of engineer and understand stats? Probably
not considering you have Lendl on top.
 
 
 
 
>> wanting independent India,
>> so he was definitely a patriot,
 
> A patriot need not be a nationalist and vice versa.
 
 
That's essentially the same thing. The root of the words are the
same and similar. It's just gay virtue signaling, using term
patriotism over nationalism. One just "sounds more
PC".
 
 
 
 
>>it doesn't matter if he strived
>> for religiously unified greater Indian subcontinent
 
> No he did not. You doofus. He wanted Hindus and Muslims to live together. But the Muslims of the Northeast did not want to and formed their own country. In fact India has close to 200 million Muslims now.
 
Good for you.
 
 
> Not all Muslims are the same. Some are fanatics and some are extremely tolerant of other religions. The Muslims in India are more or less extremely liberal and consider India to be their home country. Most of the top actors of Bollywood and other India film industries are Muslim. We had a well respected Muslim President. Try that in America, it will never happen.
 
 
Why would America have a Muslim president? Care to explain that?
 
When will India have a Russian orthodox president? And why should
it have one in the first place?
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 09:59AM -0700

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, *skriptis wrote:
 
> > He respected all religions and was tolerant to all cultures. He considered Hindus, Muslims and Christians his brothers. He didn't even hate the English. He just wanted them to free India.
 
> He was a nationalist and a patriot but both kinda wise, realising
> British were too powerful, and also somewhat of a chicken so he
 
Gandhi a chicken? Fuck off.
 
> brothers. If we're all the same, and you like everyone the same,
> do you really even love the ones that are close to you? How do
> you love your own, if you love everyone the same?
 
I have very close Christian and Muslims friends. And I dont see anything wrong with them.
 
 
> Good for you.
 
> > Not all Muslims are the same. Some are fanatics and some are extremely tolerant of other religions. The Muslims in India are more or less extremely liberal and consider India to be their home country. Most of the top actors of Bollywood and other India film industries are Muslim. We had a well respected Muslim President. Try that in America, it will never happen.
 
> Why would America have a Muslim president? Care to explain that?
 
Why not? There are a lot of Muslim Americans who are citizens. Also Hindu Americans who are also citizens.
 
 
> When will India have a Russian orthodox president?
 
Why not if he is a naturalized India. Sonia Gandhi was elected Indian Prime Minister and she is Italian who is naturalized as an Indian citizen.
 
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Apr 30 09:42AM -0700

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Sampras_career_statistics#Record_against_other_players
 
Richard Krajicek (4–6)
Lleyton Hewitt (4–5)
Michael Stich (4–5)
Marat Safin (3–4)
Sergi Bruguera (2–3)
 
LOL... so much so for dominating players from his own era.
 
Even geriatric players from the 80s gave him a tough time except Connors and McEnroe.
 
Boris Becker (12–7)
Stefan Edberg (8–6)
Ivan Lendl (5–3)
John McEnroe (3–0)
Jimmy Connors (2–0)
Mats Wilander (2–1)
 
He lost 17 times to Becker/Edberg/Lendl/Wilander.
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.