Re: a retort + a comment + a question = [RANT]

[Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>]

SUCRUM22_at_INDY-ADP@smtp-gw.cv62.navy.mil wrote:
>  tim may wrote:
>  >"...and that discussions of other topics bother you should be a clear
>  >indication you're probably on the wrong list."
>         uh, that's _why_ i am on this list...

[ka-snip, ka-snip]

>  dale thorn(?) wrote:

[mo' snip]

>  >Second, any truly secret messaging taking place represents a serious
>  >threat to the military, and contrary to some naive popular opinion,
>  >those guys are not going to lay down for this...

>  what does the military have to do wiht private citizens conversing in
>  secret?

Why should they care?  Huh?  Well, unless you can give them a list that
separates all the sheeple from the wolves, I guess they'll have to
continue their random monitoring just to make sure...

> are _you_ one of the naive that think men actually in uniform control
> the military?  the SecDef is a civillian. the president is a democrat.

Does anyone really care that the "persons in charge" wear uniforms?

> the military does what the white house/congress tell it (the writer
> realizes this is a vastly over-simplified response to a vastly broad statement).

Oh, sure they do.  Let me tell you something.  Big money tells little
money what to do.  I won't bother you with details, as it's beyond the
capacity of email at this time.  But if you think the President is really
in charge, sorry, he's "administratively" in charge, and subject to:

1. Impeachment (the "normal" method of removal, if he doesn't play ball).

2. Other kinds of removal, by Big Money, some of which are very messy.
   Go look at the Zapruder film.  If you think "Oswald" did it, don't
   even bother to reply, as such a reply would go unread.