From: Dutch <no@email.com>
Subject: Re: MSNBC Terror Analyst Insists, NYC Attack ‘Not Islam,' Could've Been 'Radicalized Catholics'
Full headers:
X-Received: by 10.200.34.107 with SMTP id p40mr6048696qtp.32.1509736766707;
Fri, 03 Nov 2017 12:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
Path: news.netfront.net!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!z50no1807756qtj.0!news-out.google.com!v14ni2395qtc.0!nntp.google.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad!fx42.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_MSNBC_Terror_Analyst_Insists=2c_NYC_Attack_=e2=80=98N?=
=?UTF-8?Q?ot_Islam=2c_Couldve_Been_Radicalized_Catholics?=
Newsgroups: rec.gambling.poker
References: <7t6lvc5p32ph2jugs3nbnd98r9jgfugn7m@4ax.com>
<82508960-2ca6-49ec-9b7a-42a8d4ff6c08@googlegroups.com>
<90vmvc1e4vocck1fhpu3s42p2p58qe08mq@4ax.com>
<07e55342-481b-489a-9aad-3325ddcbc946@googlegroups.com>
<G1OKB.31758$2w2.9540@fx16.iad>
<debb2813-9edb-41b7-95ed-ac0fddc867c0@googlegroups.com>
From: Dutch <no@email.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:49.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/49.0 SeaMonkey/2.46
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <debb2813-9edb-41b7-95ed-ac0fddc867c0@googlegroups.com>
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <2j3LB.88338$a03.75524@fx42.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenetserver.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2017 19:19:26 UTC
Organization: UsenetServer - www.usenetserver.com
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 12:18:58 -0700
X-Received-Bytes: 1486
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3431317201
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Original-Bytes: 1424
Print Article
Forward Article
VegasJerry wrote:
> On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 4:40:26 PM UTC-7, Dutch wrote:
>> VegasJerry wrote:
>>>> My agenda is fuck Muslims that use violence to foist their backward
>>>>> assed ideology on everyone else.
>>> Like we didn't know that; duh!
>>
>> Do you disagree with that agenda?
>
> Embarrassing Seymore?
>
His agenda as stated above, do you disagree with it?