Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Wimpy Post from weak Minds
Wimpy Post from weak Minds
All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
Buy your smokes Online.
Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
So Boya New York, New York !
All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
Buy your smokes Online.
Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
So Boya New York, New York !
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
In article
<6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c378@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
So_Boya@yahoo,com wrote:
> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
>
> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
>
> Buy your smokes Online.
>
> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
>
> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
>
> So Boya New York, New York !
The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
In article
<6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c378@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
So_Boya@yahoo,com wrote:
> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
>
> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
>
> Buy your smokes Online.
>
> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
>
> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
>
> So Boya New York, New York !
The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
On Jun 6, 6:46 am, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> In article
> <6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
>
> So B...@yahoo,com wrote:
> > All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
>
> > That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
>
> > Buy your smokes Online.
>
> > Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
>
> > It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
>
> > So Boya New York, New York !
>
> The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
> that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
> discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
> definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
>
> Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
> your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
> sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
> when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
> enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
> departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
> happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
> well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
The Lies you will tell.....
They would have to work to make that accomplishment.
Working for the money just seems like they can do better.
Indian tobacco sellers won't give records over. They have
their own soverign nation.
Just raise your state taxs should any shortfalls occur.
Here's reality about the economy, he's right
(.DJUSRU) fell 4.5 percent this week
Shame Him see's this is good !
http :// www .mlive,com /news/bctimes/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1210500925198560.xml&coll=4
What a drag: Smokers, bar owners say Legislature should butt out of
business
Sunday, May 11, 2008By Nicolas Persons npersons@bc-times,com |
895-3525
Jackie O'Quinn of Bay City is moving south soon, to either Georgia or
South Carolina. And after the state Senate's vote to ban smoking in
Michigan businesses, the cigar smoker knows he's making the right
decision.
The smoking ban ''makes me feel good about leaving,'' said the regular
customer at Timothy's Fine Tobaccos in downtown Bay City. ''I think it
would be the equivalent of a restaurant owner telling a customer they
can't come in to have lunch,'' he said.
The Michigan Senate on Thursday approved a bill that would ban smoking
in Michigan's businesses. The proposal will go back to the House,
which approved a similar measure in December. If passed, it will
proceed to Gov. Jennifer Granholm for signature as early as next
week.
Like O'Quinn, owners of bars and restaurants aren't happy with the
move.
Bay City businessman Arthur P. Dore owns multiple bars and restaurants
in Bay City and Saginaw. One of his bars, The Stables, 804 E. Midland
St., serves cigars and martinis. He said the bill restricts the rights
of Michigan residents.
''If a person wants to smoke, it should be up to them,'' he said. ''If
a person doesn't want to be in an area like that, then they shouldn't
go.''
The House's measure would have allowed some establishments to be
exempt from the ban, such as bingo halls, horse tracks, cigar bars and
smoke shops. But the Senate stripped those provisions, which would
hurt businesses like Timothy's Fine Tobaccos, 115 Center Ave., which
has an entire floor designated as a smoking lounge.
''I think this is ridiculous. It's very bad for business,'' said the
store's owner, Tim Socier. ''Whether we survive it or not, we'll have
to see.''
Socier said he is fine wit h a policy that would prohibit smoking in
typical workplaces. But individual bars and restaurants would be
better off being policed by business owners, not legislation, he
said.
''I'm perplexed as to why the government gets invol-ved in commerce,''
he said. ''If there's so many businesses that want to be non-smoking,
then let their customers do that. That's the beautiful thing about
America. ... People have choices.''
John Roszatycki owns Washington Lanes, 1205 Washington Ave., and
American Amusements, which provides vending services, including
tobacco-dispensing machines. He said if the law passes he would have
to lay off three or four employees.
''I know there will be a negative financial impact on the state. It
hurts every business,'' Roszatycki said. ''There's no good that can
truly come of it.''
More than 30 states already outlaw smoking in public or work areas,
with varying stipulations.
Supporters of the smoking ban say studies show businesses in other
states were not negatively impacted by smoking bans.
Roszatycki, however, believes such policies weaken the economy.
''I can only conclude that that will carry over into Michigan - more
hardship, more loss of business,'' he said.
The Dow Jones U.S. Restaurants & Bars index (.DJUSRU) fell 4.5 percent
this week, its worst five-day percentage decline since the first
trading week of the year.
Raise their gas price as not to imbalance the commody exchange.
On Jun 6, 6:46 am, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> In article
> <6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
>
> So B...@yahoo,com wrote:
> > All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
>
> > That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
>
> > Buy your smokes Online.
>
> > Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
>
> > It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
>
> > So Boya New York, New York !
>
> The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
> that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
> discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
> definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
>
> Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
> your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
> sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
> when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
> enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
> departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
> happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
> well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
The Lies you will tell.....
They would have to work to make that accomplishment.
Working for the money just seems like they can do better.
Indian tobacco sellers won't give records over. They have
their own soverign nation.
Just raise your state taxs should any shortfalls occur.
Here's reality about the economy, he's right
(.DJUSRU) fell 4.5 percent this week
Shame Him see's this is good !
http :// www .mlive,com /news/bctimes/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1210500925198560.xml&coll=4
What a drag: Smokers, bar owners say Legislature should butt out of
business
Sunday, May 11, 2008By Nicolas Persons npersons@bc-times,com |
895-3525
Jackie O'Quinn of Bay City is moving south soon, to either Georgia or
South Carolina. And after the state Senate's vote to ban smoking in
Michigan businesses, the cigar smoker knows he's making the right
decision.
The smoking ban ''makes me feel good about leaving,'' said the regular
customer at Timothy's Fine Tobaccos in downtown Bay City. ''I think it
would be the equivalent of a restaurant owner telling a customer they
can't come in to have lunch,'' he said.
The Michigan Senate on Thursday approved a bill that would ban smoking
in Michigan's businesses. The proposal will go back to the House,
which approved a similar measure in December. If passed, it will
proceed to Gov. Jennifer Granholm for signature as early as next
week.
Like O'Quinn, owners of bars and restaurants aren't happy with the
move.
Bay City businessman Arthur P. Dore owns multiple bars and restaurants
in Bay City and Saginaw. One of his bars, The Stables, 804 E. Midland
St., serves cigars and martinis. He said the bill restricts the rights
of Michigan residents.
''If a person wants to smoke, it should be up to them,'' he said. ''If
a person doesn't want to be in an area like that, then they shouldn't
go.''
The House's measure would have allowed some establishments to be
exempt from the ban, such as bingo halls, horse tracks, cigar bars and
smoke shops. But the Senate stripped those provisions, which would
hurt businesses like Timothy's Fine Tobaccos, 115 Center Ave., which
has an entire floor designated as a smoking lounge.
''I think this is ridiculous. It's very bad for business,'' said the
store's owner, Tim Socier. ''Whether we survive it or not, we'll have
to see.''
Socier said he is fine wit h a policy that would prohibit smoking in
typical workplaces. But individual bars and restaurants would be
better off being policed by business owners, not legislation, he
said.
''I'm perplexed as to why the government gets invol-ved in commerce,''
he said. ''If there's so many businesses that want to be non-smoking,
then let their customers do that. That's the beautiful thing about
America. ... People have choices.''
John Roszatycki owns Washington Lanes, 1205 Washington Ave., and
American Amusements, which provides vending services, including
tobacco-dispensing machines. He said if the law passes he would have
to lay off three or four employees.
''I know there will be a negative financial impact on the state. It
hurts every business,'' Roszatycki said. ''There's no good that can
truly come of it.''
More than 30 states already outlaw smoking in public or work areas,
with varying stipulations.
Supporters of the smoking ban say studies show businesses in other
states were not negatively impacted by smoking bans.
Roszatycki, however, believes such policies weaken the economy.
''I can only conclude that that will carry over into Michigan - more
hardship, more loss of business,'' he said.
The Dow Jones U.S. Restaurants & Bars index (.DJUSRU) fell 4.5 percent
this week, its worst five-day percentage decline since the first
trading week of the year.
Raise their gas price as not to imbalance the commody exchange.
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:46:07 -0400, Shawn Hirn <srhi@comcast,net > wrote:
>In article
><6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c378@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
> So_Boya@yahoo,com wrote:
>
>> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
>>
>> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
>>
>> Buy your smokes Online.
>>
>> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
>>
>> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
>>
>> So Boya New York, New York !
>
>The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
>that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
>discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
>definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
>
>Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
>your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
>sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
>when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
>enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
>departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
>happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
>well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
An estimated 5% of internet buyers have been billed for state taxes. The biggest source of
information was eSmokes,com , a non-indian merchant who voluntarily turned over sales
records. No indian seller has ever betrayed its customers, as far as I know.
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:46:07 -0400, Shawn Hirn <srhi@comcast,net > wrote:
>In article
><6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c378@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
> So_Boya@yahoo,com wrote:
>
>> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
>>
>> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
>>
>> Buy your smokes Online.
>>
>> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
>>
>> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
>>
>> So Boya New York, New York !
>
>The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
>that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
>discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
>definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
>
>Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
>your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
>sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
>when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
>enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
>departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
>happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
>well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
An estimated 5% of internet buyers have been billed for state taxes. The biggest source of
information was eSmokes,com , a non-indian merchant who voluntarily turned over sales
records. No indian seller has ever betrayed its customers, as far as I know.
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
In article <saci44d634ukhi6tj13gqnseiqid38adh2@4ax,com >,
Robert <no@e.mail> wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:46:07 -0400, Shawn Hirn <srhi@comcast,net > wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c378@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
> > So_Boya@yahoo,com wrote:
> >
> >> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
> >>
> >> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
> >>
> >> Buy your smokes Online.
> >>
> >> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
> >>
> >> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
> >>
> >> So Boya New York, New York !
> >
> >The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
> >that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
> >discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
> >definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
> >
> >Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
> >your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
> >sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
> >when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
> >enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
> >departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
> >happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
> >well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
>
> An estimated 5% of internet buyers have been billed for state taxes. The
> biggest source of information was eSmokes,com , a non-indian merchant who
> voluntarily turned over sales records. No indian seller has ever betrayed
> its customers, as far as I know.
I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
of information.
In article <saci44d634ukhi6tj13gqnseiqid38adh2@4ax,com >,
Robert <no@e.mail> wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:46:07 -0400, Shawn Hirn <srhi@comcast,net > wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c378@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
> > So_Boya@yahoo,com wrote:
> >
> >> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
> >>
> >> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
> >>
> >> Buy your smokes Online.
> >>
> >> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
> >>
> >> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
> >>
> >> So Boya New York, New York !
> >
> >The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
> >that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
> >discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
> >definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
> >
> >Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
> >your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
> >sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
> >when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
> >enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
> >departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
> >happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
> >well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
>
> An estimated 5% of internet buyers have been billed for state taxes. The
> biggest source of information was eSmokes,com , a non-indian merchant who
> voluntarily turned over sales records. No indian seller has ever betrayed
> its customers, as far as I know.
I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
of information.
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
On Jun 6, 9:51 pm, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> In article <saci44d634ukhi6tj13gqnseiqid38a...@4ax,com >,
>
>
>
>
>
> Robert <n...@e.mail> wrote:
> > On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:46:07 -0400, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
>
> > >In article
> > ><6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
> > > So B...@yahoo,com wrote:
>
> > >> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
>
> > >> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
>
> > >> Buy your smokes Online.
>
> > >> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
>
> > >> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
>
> > >> So Boya New York, New York !
>
> > >The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
> > >that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
> > >discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
> > >definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
>
> > >Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
> > >your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
> > >sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
> > >when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
> > >enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
> > >departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
> > >happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
> > >well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
>
> > An estimated 5% of internet buyers have been billed for state taxes. The
> > biggest source of information was eSmokes,com , a non-indian merchant who
> > voluntarily turned over sales records. No indian seller has ever betrayed
> > its customers, as far as I know.
>
> I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> of information.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Weasel troll, tell us just what favors the indians want.
A simpleton knows all the treaties are a done deal.
Liars and the lies they tell:
Smell the bullshit Here:
Hillary pulls for S.D. Indian vote Big Talker funky Walker.....
Indian Country Today - May 23 6:23 AMWASHINGTON - In another sign that
the Democratic race for the White House will go down to the wire, Sen.
Hillary Clinton has released a sweeping ''South Dakota Native American
Agenda'' that aims to increase opportunity and improve the quality of
services for Indians in the state.
Promises, Promises all Bullshit..
http :// www .indiancountry,com /content.cfm?id=1096417348
Promises, Promises all Bullshit..
South Dakota Indian reservations, which currently contain four of the
five counties in the U.S. with the lowest per capita income, are in
dire need in the work force development area. Over the last seven
years, income levels for American Indians have remained stagnant, and
in South Dakota, less than 40 percent of the reservation population is
employed.
or maybe:
Dudley DoWright to the rescue...
http :// politicom.moldova.org/stiri/eng/117595/
Maybe the RCMP will invade the reservation, and be shot to pieces
next??
A majority of the total comes from the Akwesasne reservation, which
straddles southeastern Ontario and upstate New York, the report said.
Just go there and raid them.
27 indicted in illegal cigarette trade ~~ didn't take long did it.
http :// www .amny,com /news/local/am-butts0606,0,7602038.story?track=rss
AM New York - Jun 06 7:07 AMTwenty-seven people have been indicted on
charges of trafficking in millions of dollars in untaxed cigarettes
taken from Virginia for resale in Michigan and New York, where the
nation's highest cigarette taxes are fueling a booming black market.
Smokers taxed because of HOPE ??? Fuck Them !
7.Health officials hope high taxes will spur people to quit
WCAX-TV Vermont - Jun 04 12:20 AMAssociated Press - June 4, 2008 3:15
AM ET ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) -
Health officials launched a media campaign urging people to quit
smoking as New York's tax on cigarettes became the highest in the...
Why don't they have names?
It just looks like their gonna have to start shooting in NY's
cigarette convoys.
Nothing New...prohibition caused it last time.
Well they asked for it...Now they'll have it.
SO BOYA
On Jun 6, 9:51 pm, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> In article <saci44d634ukhi6tj13gqnseiqid38a...@4ax,com >,
>
>
>
>
>
> Robert <n...@e.mail> wrote:
> > On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:46:07 -0400, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
>
> > >In article
> > ><6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
> > > So B...@yahoo,com wrote:
>
> > >> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
>
> > >> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
>
> > >> Buy your smokes Online.
>
> > >> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
>
> > >> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
>
> > >> So Boya New York, New York !
>
> > >The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
> > >that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
> > >discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
> > >definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
>
> > >Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
> > >your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
> > >sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
> > >when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
> > >enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
> > >departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
> > >happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
> > >well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
>
> > An estimated 5% of internet buyers have been billed for state taxes. The
> > biggest source of information was eSmokes,com , a non-indian merchant who
> > voluntarily turned over sales records. No indian seller has ever betrayed
> > its customers, as far as I know.
>
> I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> of information.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Weasel troll, tell us just what favors the indians want.
A simpleton knows all the treaties are a done deal.
Liars and the lies they tell:
Smell the bullshit Here:
Hillary pulls for S.D. Indian vote Big Talker funky Walker.....
Indian Country Today - May 23 6:23 AMWASHINGTON - In another sign that
the Democratic race for the White House will go down to the wire, Sen.
Hillary Clinton has released a sweeping ''South Dakota Native American
Agenda'' that aims to increase opportunity and improve the quality of
services for Indians in the state.
Promises, Promises all Bullshit..
http :// www .indiancountry,com /content.cfm?id=1096417348
Promises, Promises all Bullshit..
South Dakota Indian reservations, which currently contain four of the
five counties in the U.S. with the lowest per capita income, are in
dire need in the work force development area. Over the last seven
years, income levels for American Indians have remained stagnant, and
in South Dakota, less than 40 percent of the reservation population is
employed.
or maybe:
Dudley DoWright to the rescue...
http :// politicom.moldova.org/stiri/eng/117595/
Maybe the RCMP will invade the reservation, and be shot to pieces
next??
A majority of the total comes from the Akwesasne reservation, which
straddles southeastern Ontario and upstate New York, the report said.
Just go there and raid them.
27 indicted in illegal cigarette trade ~~ didn't take long did it.
http :// www .amny,com /news/local/am-butts0606,0,7602038.story?track=rss
AM New York - Jun 06 7:07 AMTwenty-seven people have been indicted on
charges of trafficking in millions of dollars in untaxed cigarettes
taken from Virginia for resale in Michigan and New York, where the
nation's highest cigarette taxes are fueling a booming black market.
Smokers taxed because of HOPE ??? Fuck Them !
7.Health officials hope high taxes will spur people to quit
WCAX-TV Vermont - Jun 04 12:20 AMAssociated Press - June 4, 2008 3:15
AM ET ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) -
Health officials launched a media campaign urging people to quit
smoking as New York's tax on cigarettes became the highest in the...
Why don't they have names?
It just looks like their gonna have to start shooting in NY's
cigarette convoys.
Nothing New...prohibition caused it last time.
Well they asked for it...Now they'll have it.
SO BOYA
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
In article
<a212fbff-c211-4e74-a40c-84e0bd2a968f@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups,com >,
So_Boya@yahoo,com wrote:
> On Jun 6, 9:51 pm, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> > In article <saci44d634ukhi6tj13gqnseiqid38a...@4ax,com >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Robert <n...@e.mail> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:46:07 -0400, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> >
> > > >In article
> > > ><6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
> > > > So_B...@yahoo,com wrote:
> >
> > > >> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
> >
> > > >> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
> >
> > > >> Buy your smokes Online.
> >
> > > >> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
> >
> > > >> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
> >
> > > >> So Boya New York, New York !
> >
> > > >The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
> > > >that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
> > > >discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
> > > >definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
> >
> > > >Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
> > > >your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
> > > >sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
> > > >when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
> > > >enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
> > > >departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
> > > >happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
> > > >well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
> >
> > > An estimated 5% of internet buyers have been billed for state taxes. The
> > > biggest source of information was eSmokes,com , a non-indian merchant who
> > > voluntarily turned over sales records. No indian seller has ever betrayed
> > > its customers, as far as I know.
> >
> > I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> > the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> > sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> > it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> > some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> > of information.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Weasel troll, tell us just what favors the indians want.
> A simpleton knows all the treaties are a done deal.
Perhaps more land and rights to have casinos, not to mention federal
assistance in several areas such as land management, college tuition
assistance, and some other social programs, just to name a few.
In article
<a212fbff-c211-4e74-a40c-84e0bd2a968f@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups,com >,
So_Boya@yahoo,com wrote:
> On Jun 6, 9:51 pm, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> > In article <saci44d634ukhi6tj13gqnseiqid38a...@4ax,com >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Robert <n...@e.mail> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:46:07 -0400, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> >
> > > >In article
> > > ><6d66f1b5-453b-45a6-83ca-60b98954c...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups,com >,
> > > > So_B...@yahoo,com wrote:
> >
> > > >> All the Wimps post about tax the smokers to death in New York.
> >
> > > >> That's just a great plan to help the ecomony.
> >
> > > >> Buy your smokes Online.
> >
> > > >> Do your part to Help Empty out Those tax coffers.
> >
> > > >> It's So Simple to Make them Broke.
> >
> > > >> So Boya New York, New York !
> >
> > > >The primary idea behind taxing cancer sticks isn't to help the economy;
> > > >that is a benefit, but its not the main benefit. The real benefit is to
> > > >discourage people from smoking, especially kids. Heavier cigarette taxes
> > > >definitely do discourage more people from smoking.
> >
> > > >Buying cancer sticks online may work for some, but don't be surprised if
> > > >your state's revenue department sues you for back taxes. Selling cancer
> > > >sticks online to underaged people gets those companies in trouble, and
> > > >when that happens, their business records come into the hands of law
> > > >enforcement, and they eventually find their way to states' revenue
> > > >departments, and then you get a nice letter in the mail. This has
> > > >happened to several people in NJ where I live who were each sued for
> > > >well in excess of $1,000 each in back taxes.
> >
> > > An estimated 5% of internet buyers have been billed for state taxes. The
> > > biggest source of information was eSmokes,com , a non-indian merchant who
> > > voluntarily turned over sales records. No indian seller has ever betrayed
> > > its customers, as far as I know.
> >
> > I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> > the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> > sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> > it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> > some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> > of information.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Weasel troll, tell us just what favors the indians want.
> A simpleton knows all the treaties are a done deal.
Perhaps more land and rights to have casinos, not to mention federal
assistance in several areas such as land management, college tuition
assistance, and some other social programs, just to name a few.
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
Deep thinker Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net > wrote:
> Perhaps more land and rights to have casinos, not to mention federal
> assistance in several areas such as land management, college tuition
> assistance, and some other social programs, just to name a few.
Now, again, this solid information is based upon your scholarly
expertise, and your ability to derive logical conclusions from that
stellar thought process of yours, right? Or is it just more mindless
net-twaddle coming from a mindless super-troll. Gee, let me think
about that one. LOL!
Let "the Indians" handle their own business General Custer, while you
stick to what you know best - feeding your gambling addiction in their
casinos, chomping on your cheese fries, and building up your troll-
dropping numbers. Whadda doofus.
TBN
Deep thinker Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net > wrote:
> Perhaps more land and rights to have casinos, not to mention federal
> assistance in several areas such as land management, college tuition
> assistance, and some other social programs, just to name a few.
Now, again, this solid information is based upon your scholarly
expertise, and your ability to derive logical conclusions from that
stellar thought process of yours, right? Or is it just more mindless
net-twaddle coming from a mindless super-troll. Gee, let me think
about that one. LOL!
Let "the Indians" handle their own business General Custer, while you
stick to what you know best - feeding your gambling addiction in their
casinos, chomping on your cheese fries, and building up your troll-
dropping numbers. Whadda doofus.
TBN
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
In article
<c8cb742e-ce74-41e2-bb9b-62854dfd1dd3@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups,com >,
The BIG N <nizo1@verizon,net > wrote:
> Deep thinker Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net > wrote:
>
>
> > Perhaps more land and rights to have casinos, not to mention federal
> > assistance in several areas such as land management, college tuition
> > assistance, and some other social programs, just to name a few.
>
> Now, again, this solid information is based upon your scholarly
> expertise, and your ability to derive logical conclusions from that
> stellar thought process of yours, right? Or is it just more mindless
> net-twaddle coming from a mindless super-troll. Gee, let me think
> about that one. LOL!
>
> Let "the Indians" handle their own business General Custer, while you
> stick to what you know best - feeding your gambling addiction in their
> casinos, chomping on your cheese fries, and building up your troll-
> dropping numbers. Whadda doofus.
Where in my response did I indicate I was against the Indians handling
their own business. For you smokers who buy your cancer sticks from the
Indians, the risk is entirely on you that they may eventually decide to
share their customer data with the feds or directly with state
governments.
By the way, there you go being schizo again. First you take me to task
for not referring to Indians as "Native Americans" and now, you are
doing the exact same thing you faulted me for. This is another example
of your schizoness and hypocrisy.
In article
<c8cb742e-ce74-41e2-bb9b-62854dfd1dd3@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups,com >,
The BIG N <nizo1@verizon,net > wrote:
> Deep thinker Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net > wrote:
>
>
> > Perhaps more land and rights to have casinos, not to mention federal
> > assistance in several areas such as land management, college tuition
> > assistance, and some other social programs, just to name a few.
>
> Now, again, this solid information is based upon your scholarly
> expertise, and your ability to derive logical conclusions from that
> stellar thought process of yours, right? Or is it just more mindless
> net-twaddle coming from a mindless super-troll. Gee, let me think
> about that one. LOL!
>
> Let "the Indians" handle their own business General Custer, while you
> stick to what you know best - feeding your gambling addiction in their
> casinos, chomping on your cheese fries, and building up your troll-
> dropping numbers. Whadda doofus.
Where in my response did I indicate I was against the Indians handling
their own business. For you smokers who buy your cancer sticks from the
Indians, the risk is entirely on you that they may eventually decide to
share their customer data with the feds or directly with state
governments.
By the way, there you go being schizo again. First you take me to task
for not referring to Indians as "Native Americans" and now, you are
doing the exact same thing you faulted me for. This is another example
of your schizoness and hypocrisy.
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
That acute historian and social commentator, Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net >
wrote:
>
> I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> of information.
I would guess that your in depth study and experience with "Indian"
culture, motivation, and social dynamics would lead you to present
your erroneous statement and baseless conclusion, right?
By "Indians" do you mean Native Americans? Conceptually bankrupt,
ignorant AND rude. Whadda jackass.
TBN
That acute historian and social commentator, Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net >
wrote:
>
> I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> of information.
I would guess that your in depth study and experience with "Indian"
culture, motivation, and social dynamics would lead you to present
your erroneous statement and baseless conclusion, right?
By "Indians" do you mean Native Americans? Conceptually bankrupt,
ignorant AND rude. Whadda jackass.
TBN
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
In article
<31dd4c4b-f7d9-421d-a7f3-c87577ad7318@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups,com >,
The BIG N <nizo1@verizon,net > wrote:
> That acute historian and social commentator, Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net >
> wrote:
>
> >
> > I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> > the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> > sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> > it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> > some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> > of information.
>
> I would guess that your in depth study and experience with "Indian"
> culture, motivation, and social dynamics would lead you to present
> your erroneous statement and baseless conclusion, right?
>
> By "Indians" do you mean Native Americans? Conceptually bankrupt,
> ignorant AND rude. Whadda jackass.
What a hypocrite. You said nothing about Robert for using the name
"Indian" yet he was the one who raised that issue here, not me, and
Robert was the one who used that name, not me.
Oh, and in your first sentence, its "in-depth".
You're a nicotine addicted hypocrite.
In article
<31dd4c4b-f7d9-421d-a7f3-c87577ad7318@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups,com >,
The BIG N <nizo1@verizon,net > wrote:
> That acute historian and social commentator, Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net >
> wrote:
>
> >
> > I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> > the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> > sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> > it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> > some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> > of information.
>
> I would guess that your in depth study and experience with "Indian"
> culture, motivation, and social dynamics would lead you to present
> your erroneous statement and baseless conclusion, right?
>
> By "Indians" do you mean Native Americans? Conceptually bankrupt,
> ignorant AND rude. Whadda jackass.
What a hypocrite. You said nothing about Robert for using the name
"Indian" yet he was the one who raised that issue here, not me, and
Robert was the one who used that name, not me.
Oh, and in your first sentence, its "in-depth".
You're a nicotine addicted hypocrite.
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
On Jun 7, 6:41 am, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> In article
> <31dd4c4b-f7d9-421d-a7f3-c87577ad7...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups,com >,
> The BIG N <ni...@verizon,net > wrote:
>
>
>
> > That acute historian and social commentator, Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net >
> > wrote:
>
> > > I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> > > the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> > > sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> > > it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> > > some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> > > of information.
>
> > I would guess that your in depth study and experience with "Indian"
> > culture, motivation, and social dynamics would lead you to present
> > your erroneous statement and baseless conclusion, right?
>
> > By "Indians" do you mean Native Americans? Conceptually bankrupt,
> > ignorant AND rude. Whadda jackass.
>
> What a hypocrite. You said nothing about Robert for using the name
> "Indian" yet he was the one who raised that issue here, not me, and
> Robert was the one who used that name, not me.
That's called begging the question, slow-thinker.What does Robert have
to do with you? You are the nut-case who sets himself as a net-know-it-
all but who in reality is dumb as a rock. You are the lame-brain who
cruises the newsgroups with your superficial and mindless twaddle. To
include yourself in the same sentence with Robert is one more
illustration of your stupidity and dullness. If The BIG N has an issue
with Robert, The BIG N will take it up with Robert. This
correspondence is about you, the "expert", who in reality is an idiot.
Get it?
>
> You're a nicotine addicted hypocrite.
Hmmm . . . interesting coming from a silly ass responsible for 42,580
troll-droppings on 600+ newsgroups. Whadda doofus. LOL!
TBN - reelin' 'em in.
On Jun 7, 6:41 am, Shawn Hirn <s...@comcast,net > wrote:
> In article
> <31dd4c4b-f7d9-421d-a7f3-c87577ad7...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups,com >,
> The BIG N <ni...@verizon,net > wrote:
>
>
>
> > That acute historian and social commentator, Troll Shane <DOOFUS,net >
> > wrote:
>
> > > I don't dispute you. Just keep in mind that at some point, the feds and
> > > the Indian cancer stick merchants will strike an agreement where the
> > > sales information will be turned over to the feds, who will than share
> > > it with states. The Indians want lots of favors from the feds, so at
> > > some point, one of those favors is going to end up involving a sharing
> > > of information.
>
> > I would guess that your in depth study and experience with "Indian"
> > culture, motivation, and social dynamics would lead you to present
> > your erroneous statement and baseless conclusion, right?
>
> > By "Indians" do you mean Native Americans? Conceptually bankrupt,
> > ignorant AND rude. Whadda jackass.
>
> What a hypocrite. You said nothing about Robert for using the name
> "Indian" yet he was the one who raised that issue here, not me, and
> Robert was the one who used that name, not me.
That's called begging the question, slow-thinker.What does Robert have
to do with you? You are the nut-case who sets himself as a net-know-it-
all but who in reality is dumb as a rock. You are the lame-brain who
cruises the newsgroups with your superficial and mindless twaddle. To
include yourself in the same sentence with Robert is one more
illustration of your stupidity and dullness. If The BIG N has an issue
with Robert, The BIG N will take it up with Robert. This
correspondence is about you, the "expert", who in reality is an idiot.
Get it?
>
> You're a nicotine addicted hypocrite.
Hmmm . . . interesting coming from a silly ass responsible for 42,580
troll-droppings on 600+ newsgroups. Whadda doofus. LOL!
TBN - reelin' 'em in.
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 21:26:15 -0700 (PDT), The BIG N <nizo1@verizon,net > wrote:
>By "Indians" do you mean Native Americans? Conceptually bankrupt,
>ignorant AND rude. Whadda jackass.
Most indians dislike the term Native American. They prefer to be called indian or by their
tribe's name.
Most of us are native Americans, in the sense that we were born in America. I don't
capitalize indian because they're not from India. A long, impartial discussion can be
found here:
http :// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_name_controversy
On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 21:26:15 -0700 (PDT), The BIG N <nizo1@verizon,net > wrote:
>By "Indians" do you mean Native Americans? Conceptually bankrupt,
>ignorant AND rude. Whadda jackass.
Most indians dislike the term Native American. They prefer to be called indian or by their
tribe's name.
Most of us are native Americans, in the sense that we were born in America. I don't
capitalize indian because they're not from India. A long, impartial discussion can be
found here:
http :// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_name_controversy
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
On Jun 7, 10:55 pm, Robert <n...@e.mail> wrote:
. They prefer to be called . . . by their
> tribe's name.
This I was well aware of and personally I use the tribal name or
Native American unless I'm asked otherwise. My response to Troll Shane
( who is too stupid and defensive to get it) was to his obvious and
ongoing colonial attitude. As well as his total lack of explaining his
off-the-cuff shallow points of view. Rather than provide substance, as
you just did, he points the finger at both of us - you for "saying the
same thing he is", and me for being hypocritical. Well, no surprises
there at his level of understanding.
The BIG N
On Jun 7, 10:55 pm, Robert <n...@e.mail> wrote:
. They prefer to be called . . . by their
> tribe's name.
This I was well aware of and personally I use the tribal name or
Native American unless I'm asked otherwise. My response to Troll Shane
( who is too stupid and defensive to get it) was to his obvious and
ongoing colonial attitude. As well as his total lack of explaining his
off-the-cuff shallow points of view. Rather than provide substance, as
you just did, he points the finger at both of us - you for "saying the
same thing he is", and me for being hypocritical. Well, no surprises
there at his level of understanding.
The BIG N
Re: Wimpy Post from weak Minds
In article
<6c30ad89-06ab-4408-a3cf-86e4ad30581b@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups,com >,
The BIG N <nizo1@verizon,net > wrote:
> On Jun 7, 10:55 pm, Robert <n...@e.mail> wrote:
>
> . They prefer to be called . . . by their
> > tribe's name.
>
> This I was well aware of and personally I use the tribal name or
> Native American unless I'm asked otherwise. My response to Troll Shane
> ( who is too stupid and defensive to get it) was to his obvious and
> ongoing colonial attitude. As well as his total lack of explaining his
> off-the-cuff shallow points of view. Rather than provide substance, as
> you just did, he points the finger at both of us - you for "saying the
> same thing he is", and me for being hypocritical. Well, no surprises
> there at his level of understanding.
Oh, please. Who are you kidding. Your mind is so addled by nicotine, you
have no clue what a colonial attitude is. I have authored many
substantive postings here. Your inability to understand them due to your
cognitive impairments is sad, but it is your problem.
In article
<6c30ad89-06ab-4408-a3cf-86e4ad30581b@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups,com >,
The BIG N <nizo1@verizon,net > wrote:
> On Jun 7, 10:55 pm, Robert <n...@e.mail> wrote:
>
> . They prefer to be called . . . by their
> > tribe's name.
>
> This I was well aware of and personally I use the tribal name or
> Native American unless I'm asked otherwise. My response to Troll Shane
> ( who is too stupid and defensive to get it) was to his obvious and
> ongoing colonial attitude. As well as his total lack of explaining his
> off-the-cuff shallow points of view. Rather than provide substance, as
> you just did, he points the finger at both of us - you for "saying the
> same thing he is", and me for being hypocritical. Well, no surprises
> there at his level of understanding.
Oh, please. Who are you kidding. Your mind is so addled by nicotine, you
have no clue what a colonial attitude is. I have authored many
substantive postings here. Your inability to understand them due to your
cognitive impairments is sad, but it is your problem.
