NY Times Magazine this weekend

[Nikki]

Strange Logic:

Smoke bomb -- no big deal -- just making a statement

Home made land mines, high powered weapons -- no big deal -- just defending his property: Family.

Tear gas shells -- OMG -- Weapons of mass destruction.

10 Q for three correct answers to "Who used which where?"

And the answers have to be what I intend them to be.

[Mr. Mephistopheles]

Strange Logic:

Smoke bomb -- no big deal -- just making a statement

Home made land mines, high powered weapons -- no big deal -- just defending his property: Family.

Tear gas shells -- OMG -- Weapons of mass destruction.

10 Q for three correct answers to "Who used which where?"

And the answers have to be what I intend them to be.

1. PH at the PO

2. E&E Brown Compound

3. um um, ebil gubbermint's favorite tool against "Patriots" like the aforementioned bozos.

[Weston White]

So I take it at least one member of Quatloos is some type of employee for the NYT than?

They posted this at LH, as if it is good news new for Hendrickson, sure, sure it is.

http://losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=1606

Hell, he just might get on the Daily Show after all… or at the very least O’Reilly or Hannity and Colmes… Those in the latter cases I can tell you for sure it will not turn out good for Hendrickson… In the former Hendrickson might have a very slight chance of something positive coming from the experience.

Say, I wonder how Mr. Hendrickson celebrates? I bet he celebrates with Molotov cocktails, you know because a normal cocktail would just too boring for the likes of him!

[Weston White]

“This “truth,” Hendrickson argues, is one that the government desperately tries to conceal from its citizens. …”

Yes, sort of like how you desperately conceal the “truth” about yourself from your practitioners and followers, right? See, strange how that sort of works, huh?

[Demosthenes]

So I take it at least one member of Quatloos is some type of employee for the NYT than?

Nope.

[Weston White]

“Their understanding of the tax law is sketchy at best,” Hendrickson told me, giving voice to the narcissism of small differences that afflicts the tax-honesty movement.

They did not directly label Hendrickson as such, it was a generalized reference to the whole.

[Weston White]

Strange Logic:

Smoke bomb -- no big deal -- just making a statement

Home made land mines, high powered weapons -- no big deal -- just defending his property: Family.

Tear gas shells -- OMG -- Weapons of mass destruction.

10 Q for three correct answers to "Who used which where?"

And the answers have to be what I intend them to be.

Oh come on can't you buy some type of a "smoke bomb" from a gag/joke store?

[Demosthenes]

Oh come on can't you buy some type of a "smoke bomb" from a gag/joke store?

Weston, what Pete and friends set off was a home-made device that burned two people. Pete's girlfriend (now his wife) had taken the materials from the highschool where she worked. The fact that the smoke bomb burned an innocent bystander and a hapless postal carrier means that it wasn't a harmlessly constructed smoke bomb.

It's interesting that you think that injuring two humans is nothing but a harmless prank.

From the appellate decision:

On April 16, 1990, the last day which tax returns could be postmarked that year, a firebomb was placed in a bin at the United States Post Office in Royal Oak, Michigan. At about eight p.m., a postal worker standing near the bin and collecting mail from individuals driving in front of the post office noticed smoke coming from one of the bins. He rummaged through the bin and retrieved a smoking brown padded envelope, addressed "to the tax thieves" from "freedom loving Americans." When the postal worker tried to extinguish whatever was causing the smoke by placing it in a puddle of water and stomping on it, the bomb detonated, injuring the postal worker and a bystander.

A federal grand jury investigation uncovered witnesses who testified that several members of the Metro Detroit Libertarians had a meeting to discuss the possibility of placing a device in the mail on that day to protest the tax system. The witnesses testified that this meeting included Peter Hendrickson, his girlfriend Doreen Wright, defendant Scott Scarborough and his wife Karen. The investigation also showed that Wright had taken the red phosphorus used in making the bomb from the school district at which she worked.

[Nikki]

Strange Logic:

Smoke bomb -- no big deal -- just making a statement

Home made land mines, high powered weapons -- no big deal -- just defending his property: Family.

Tear gas shells -- OMG -- Weapons of mass destruction.

10 Q for three correct answers to "Who used which where?"

And the answers have to be what I intend them to be.

1. PH at the PO

2. E&E Brown Compound

3. um um, ebil gubbermint's favorite tool against "Patriots" like the aforementioned bozos.

Two out of three is passable, but #3 is the critical one, given its constant rehashing by the sovereignoramuses and conspiracy theorists AND another significant event on its anniversary.

[Weston White]

It's interesting that you think that injuring two humans is nothing but a harmless prank.

I do not know the actual details of the "bomb", though to use firebomb creates an image of an explosive device that is capable of destruction, as opposed to something that merely catches on fire and creates smoke.

As far as the injured parties are concerned, I am pretty sure they had fire extinguishers back in the 1980's, I could be wrong though. What that employee did was out of some combination of stupidity and poor training.

And no I am not saying that at all, I am saying it seems to me that it is being taking grossly out of context, namely for the purposes of pushing ones point of view on something else that is entirely unrelated... e.g. I can see relevance in bringing this to up to prove that Hendrickson has a history of aggression, and chaotic behavior, but it has nothing to due so far as his interpretation and beliefs in tax laws are concerned.

To further note, say somebody states to others that they hate somebody so much, that they hope that they would die a painful and prolonged death, quite frequently, making such comments in public, then months or years later that person is mysteriously killed in a traumatic golfing accident where it was determined after investigation that person head was used by an unknown individual for tee-off practice. Does that mean the suspect (who BTW hates golf) is to be the determined suspect?

[Demosthenes]

Strange Logic:

Smoke bomb -- no big deal -- just making a statement

Home made land mines, high powered weapons -- no big deal -- just defending his property: Family.

Tear gas shells -- OMG -- Weapons of mass destruction.

10 Q for three correct answers to "Who used which where?"

And the answers have to be what I intend them to be.

1. PH at the PO

2. E&E Brown Compound

3. um um, ebil gubbermint's favorite tool against "Patriots" like the aforementioned bozos.

Two out of three is passable, but #3 is the critical one, given its constant rehashing by the sovereignoramuses and conspiracy theorists AND another significant event on its anniversary.

Waco.

[Doktor Avalanche]

I do not know the actual details of the "bomb",

That much is obvious.

As far as the injured parties are concerned, I am pretty sure they had fire extinguishers back in the 1980's, I could be wrong though. What that employee did was out of some combination of stupidity and poor training.

Yes, let's blame the victim who had no idea that package was going to blow up in his face. Shame on him for not developing the necessary x-ray vision to correctly deduce there was an incendiary device in that box.

And no I am not saying that at all, I am saying it seems to me that it is being taking grossly out of context,

What part of "explosive device injured two postal workers" is taken out of context, Weston?

Help me out here.

namely for the purposes of pushing ones point of view on something else that is entirely unrelated... e.g. I can see relevance in bringing this to up to prove that Hendrickson has a history of aggression, and chaotic behavior, but it has nothing to due so far as his interpretation and beliefs in tax laws are concerned.

Bullsh*t! This had everything to do with his interpretation and his beliefs in the tax laws. Why else did he address that bomb to the IRS?

And when do you think he's going to graduate to IEDs and suicide bombers.

To further note, say somebody states to others that they hate somebody so much, that they hope that they would die a painful and prolonged death, quite frequently, making such comments in public, then months or years later that person is mysteriously killed in a traumatic golfing accident where it was determined after investigation that person head was used by an unknown individual for tee-off practice. Does that mean the suspect (who BTW hates golf) is to be the determined suspect?

Wow...I thought John Bulten was the king of weasel wording.

Of course I expected the Kool-Aid would be running through your veins for a long time to come, but this is just pathetic.

[Demosthenes]

As far as the injured parties are concerned, I am pretty sure they had fire extinguishers back in the 1980's

The bomb went off in a bin outside the post office. You believe that postal carriers and bystanders should have to approach mail bins with fire extinguishers?

Your attempts to defend the injury of two human beings is just sad.

[Doktor Avalanche]

As far as the injured parties are concerned, I am pretty sure they had fire extinguishers back in the 1980's

The bomb went off in a bin outside the post office. You believe that postal carriers and bystanders should have to approach mail bins with fire extinguishers?

Your attempts to defend the injury of two human beings is just sad.

What's even sadder is that despite having been banned from Lost Horizons, despite seeing up close and personal how wrong Pete is, despite having admitted that Pete is wrong...

...he still thinks Pete is onto something.

Welcome to Cult Deprogramming, Weston. Today's lesson:

"It's Not Okay To Bomb Innocent People"

[Weston White]

That much is obvious.

Yea, and you do? If so please post the specifics of the “bomb”, all I have access to is a few sentences about what occurred as a result of the “bomb”, which you all have somehow determined to be a “fire bomb”.

Yes, let's blame the victim who had no idea that package was going to blow up in his face. Shame on him for not developing the necessary x-ray vision to correctly deduce there was an incendiary device in that box.

If somebody steps in front of a moving vehicle and the driver is not able to completely stop before hitting that person, is the driver at fault? Presuming the driver was in accordance with all VC’? Lets stop BSing and call a spade a spade, could we do that at least?

BTW, I am not saying that blame should be placed on the victim, only that the victim brought harm onto themselves, though a dumb-dumb move. That said whatever damages occurred to them is Hendrickson’s responsibility. Though Hendrickson could also counter sue the Postal Service for improperly training and equipping their employees for such situations. So in that respect the physical harmed attributed to Hendrickson’s actions could be construed to be as much as the employers fault as Hendrickson’s.

What part of "explosive device injured two postal workers" is taken out of context, Weston?

Not sure where that is from or to what degree the injuries were, so I could not comment. Though from what I know the employee suffered only burns, fire tends to cause that. One could say that a BBQ is an explosive device. From my knowledge though explosive devices usually result in severing of major organs and appendages and the collapse of large structures. That did not seem to be the case at all.

Bullsh*t! This had everything to do with his interpretation and his beliefs in the tax laws. Why else did he address that bomb to the IRS?

Hold the phone, was it supposed to be mailed to the IRS and then explode upon opening? I have been under the impression that the intent of it was to set to letters inside the postal box on fire.

Regardless though, there are two issues to be considered and they should not be mangled into one matter, so as to keep bearing and perspective true. The act of one does not necessarily invalidate or rule out the other. If you think it does, you are a fool.

And when do you think he's going to graduate to IEDs and suicide bombers.

This was from the 1980’s, right? What violence has he been involved in since then? Though I suppose in your POV we should just ship him off to GITMO... you know just to be on the save side.

Wow...I thought John Bulten was the king of weasel wording.

Of course I expected the Kool-Aid would be running through your veins for a long time to come, but this is just pathetic.

OK, surely you jest?

[Demosthenes]

Though Hendrickson could also counter sue the Postal Service for improperly training and equipping their employees for such situations.

Moron.

[The Operative]

That much is obvious.

Yea, and you do? If so please post the specifics of the “bomb”, all I have access to is a few sentences about what occurred as a result of the “bomb”, which you all have somehow determined to be a “fire bomb”.

Weston,

'Fire bomb' are not our words. Search through this thread and find where the word 'fire' was first written.

Yes, let's blame the victim who had no idea that package was going to blow up in his face. Shame on him for not developing the necessary x-ray vision to correctly deduce there was an incendiary device in that box.

If somebody steps in front of a moving vehicle and the driver is not able to completely stop before hitting that person, is the driver at fault? Presuming the driver was in accordance with all VC’? Lets stop BSing and call a spade a spade, could we do that at least?

There are instances where the driver is at fault. However, it is NEVER legal or okay to place a device that is intended to ignite in a standard mail box.

What part of "explosive device injured two postal workers" is taken out of context, Weston?

Not sure where that is from or to what degree the injuries were, so I could not comment. Though from what I know the employee suffered only burns, fire tends to cause that. One could say that a BBQ is an explosive device. From my knowledge though explosive devices usually result in severing of major organs and appendages and the collapse of large structures. That did not seem to be the case at all.

A firecracker is an explosive device. There are different levels of explosive devices. Again, whether or not there was an intent to harm anyone, placing a device that ignites in the standard mail is not a legitimate prank and I am fairly sure it is illegal.

Bullsh*t! This had everything to do with his interpretation and his beliefs in the tax laws. Why else did he address that bomb to the IRS?

Hold the phone, was it supposed to be mailed to the IRS and then explode upon opening? I have been under the impression that the intent of it was to set to letters inside the postal box on fire.

Regardless though, there are two issues to be considered and they should not be mangled into one matter, so as to keep bearing and perspective true. The act of one does not necessarily invalidate or rule out the other. If you think it does, you are a fool.

According to the article, it was addressed to the 'Tax Thieves'. Who do you think he was referring to? I am fairly certain it is a crime for individuals to destroy mail or attempt to destroy mail that is not theirs.

What two issues are you referring to?

And when do you think he's going to graduate to IEDs and suicide bombers.

This was from the 1980’s, right? What violence has he been involved in since then? Though I suppose in your POV we should just ship him off to GITMO... you know just to be on the save side.

Wow...I thought John Bulten was the king of weasel wording.

Of course I expected the Kool-Aid would be running through your veins for a long time to come, but this is just pathetic.

OK, surely you jest?

So, he hasn't committed any crimes of violence since the 80s. We do not know what he is thinking or contemplating. Regardless of whether or not he ever commits another crime of violence, what is telling is your insistence on defending his actions.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Mindless drivel deleted.

You are a terminal fool.

Moreover, yes that package was supposed to detonate at the IRS. The fact that you can stand here and defend injuring innocent people shows your level of ethical and moral bankruptcy.

[Imalawman]

Though Hendrickson could also counter sue the Postal Service for improperly training and equipping their employees for such situations.

Goddam it. Where's the keyboard warning? I had a new Macbook.

Westy, listen man, this the wrong way to start your time here. Look, why defend a guy who placed a bomb in a mailbin? Why? What could possibly be beneficial about defending that behavior?

Don't be dumb Weston.

[Nikki]

Strange Logic:

Smoke bomb -- no big deal -- just making a statement

Home made land mines, high powered weapons -- no big deal -- just defending his property: Family.

Tear gas shells -- OMG -- Weapons of mass destruction.

10 Q for three correct answers to "Who used which where?"

And the answers have to be what I intend them to be.

1. PH at the PO

2. E&E Brown Compound

3. um um, ebil gubbermint's favorite tool against "Patriots" like the aforementioned bozos.

Two out of three is passable, but #3 is the critical one, given its constant rehashing by the sovereignoramuses and conspiracy theorists AND another significant event on its anniversary.

Waco.

Ka-ching!

Please collect your winnings from the Guardian of the Quatloosian Vault.

Oops, I forgot. That's you, isn't it?