The Real Decker Shows His Colors : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

[This post was made by Decker yesterday on the "Debunking Y2K board". My comments in brackets]

"It looks the graduates of "BFI" have gathered to discuss the finer points of Y2K. I have spent some the past month or so at the Time Bomb 2000 forum. My first post there was taken from "BFI" and cross posted. My observation--a fixed position (Y2K retreat) is impossible--created a stir. My second post was simply a compilation of my "BFI" observations. It generated 55 pages of, shall we say, vigorous opposition.

Of course, I was encouraged.

[Why, Decker, you weasel? Who are you patronizing here? Them? Us? Are you saying you were glad to increase the tension between real people on this forum? You're a REAL GENTLEMAN, aren't you? I'm sure you will yet again have a smarmy rationalization for this.]

In my occasional posts, I have found kind and thoughtful souls on the EY forum and some... not. I have noticed a decrease in vitriol of late. In my opinion, Y2K is losing steam. Those who feel preparation is necessary have already prepared. The "drop dead" dates have passed with amazingly little consequence. (And at EY, the fall of a single sparrow has Y2K implications.)

On one thread (in an angry moment), I provided this summary:

"In the face of numerous positive reports, you cling to "the code is broken" mantra. Every day I work with companies where the code is "fixed." Of course, you know that everyone... everyone is lying. The computer genuises working in the trenches and the "GIs" on this forum are the select few who really "know" what's going on. Forget the IT/IS trade press... they are part of the conspiracy, too. The CIOs who have come out and announced progress... all management liars. Why? Because "they" started "too late" and "everyone" knows it is now impossible to fix the problem. Ed Yourdon's metrics cannot be wrong. Y2K must be like all other software development projects. COBOL programmers will be making NBA superstar salaries because of high demand. No. The Euro will fail. No. Significant Y2K problems on Jan. 1, 1999. No. Major problems on April 1, 1999. No. Power plant failures due to rollover to 1999. No. 99099 Julian date causes problems. No. Stock market collapse. Not yet. I will grant you this. If Y2K is a business/government/media conspiracy, it is the best conspiracy in the history of the modern world."

Yes, I did have a tense moment or two.

[But you're SOOO proud of your anger and tension over there with your buddies. I remember that thread well since you directed the words above at me directly on that thread. And I told you on that thread and I repeat it here that I will challenge you repeatedly, over and over, when you spout this nonsense. You must indeed have been proud of this SPECIFICALLY to post it AGAIN.]

Given the continuing positive news and the energy required to sustain alarm... I think the Y2K "survivalists" are either wearing down or "going to ground." The humor (KIA ads) may also be disheartening. There is nothing more frustrating to a fanatic than not being taken seriously.

[Listen up, regulars, whether "doomer" or "polly". This is the real Decker: "nothing more frustrating to a fanatic". This is what he really thinks of me, for instance. What a total, flaming, cowardly hypocrite.]

For the record, I have enjoyed some of the work over at the EY forum... and I do not think the pessimists warrant ridicule or abuse. We are simply drawing different conclusions from the same data.

[Spare me]

While I usually avoid predictions, I think summer will be a slack time for Y2K... and then we'll see another surge of interest in late fall, perhaps enhanced if we have an October market correction.


[I can't wait to see how Decker and his apologists here spin this one. I am truly disgusted, because I had taken Decker reasonably at his "word" and begun to relax. What a fool I am. Those of you on this forum who complain about the tone that has been taken over the past month or so had better step back and seriously consider just WHO the people are who want to wreck this forum. The fact is, it's people like Decker and Poole. They view anyone except Flint-Davis-Maria as fanatics. Wake up. I'm actually pretty naive, but I have finally grasped it.]

-- BigDog (, May 06, 1999


Big Dog,

I'm glad to see that you are still here. I am genuinely sad to see the state of this forum and the whole public perception of Y2K in general. They seem to claim that Y2K is over already. Frankly, I wish it was.

-- d (d@dgi.old), May 06, 1999.

Ya Know Big Dog,

I think I've just worked out a use for my LEATHERMAN WAVE tool :)

After being away from the forum for a month a few weeks ago, I scanned the posts and my first post in a LONG time was to said Decker "Here's One For Decker" - I guess after a while you develop a sixth sense.

-- Andy (, May 06, 1999.

Having long ago dismissed Decker as an insufferable prig, I was amused by the results of your good work, BigDog, and--I admit--enjoying the sight of Decker hanging himself. Until I came to this bit:

"For the record, I have enjoyed some of the work over at the EY forum. . ."

Now THAT raises my dander. WORK? What the hell does he mean by THAT? This was some sort of experiment? What, he had to exert some effort, break a sweat--pardonnez-moi, perspiration--to be polite to us crazy, bandolier-sporting, camo-clad yahoos?

"and I do not think the pessimists warrant ridicule or abuse."

Wait, just a sec., I need to find a forelock to tug--wait, ah, there's one!--gosh, THANKS, Mister Decker!

What a patronizing bugger he is! Let's hope he's through mingling with the wretched peasants.

-- Old Git (, May 06, 1999.

'Work'. There's always the odious possibility that your and my hard-earned tax dollars are paying the pollytrolls to spin, divert, derail, and disgust the Forum.

-- h (h@h.h), May 06, 1999.

So do we now refer to this duplicitous knave as Double-Decker?

-- Old Git (, May 06, 1999.

Old Git -- no such luck about Decker or Poole leaving, at least for right now. They WANT to destroy this forum, whether because they're getting paid for it or are simply ethically perverted ... and the end result will be to destroy the legitimate dialogue that does take place between doomer/pollys (see Tom Carey's recent thread).

I don't care who flames me or pleads with me or ends up blaming me for what Decker-Poole are doing. I'm not going to play the game with them any longer or play kissy-poo with those who enjoy the cutesy word games.

-- BigDog (, May 06, 1999.

Go get 'em BigDog! Woof!

-- none (none@none.none), May 06, 1999.

I can't help fix the code, and don't want to. I can't help the imbeddeds (word?), and don't want to learn. I won't help manually in the jit problems after rollover, I didn't create them.

I can parse the news for a glimpse of reality, and do. I can try to teach my children well, and do. I can stock survival items, and will use them before their shelf life expires. I can read the posts on this board and learn from some very, very thoughtful and inspiring individuals, (that would mean you Old Git, Andy, Invar, Mr. Decker, and you BigDog), and use these inspirations when planning my actions.

I don't care if I'm taken seriously by members of this forum, or anywhere (including work).

I care if my small circle takes me seriously, and believe they do. I care about 50% of my income going to a government that does not care about my beliefs one bit. I care about the mandatory lies that the state schools spout to my children every day. I care about the FCC regulating every public communication aparatus (your computer? it's comming). I care about the children who grow up without parental support. I care about the children who never get the chance to live.

I don't care about any body veiwing me as a fanatic for owning guns, canned goods, and seeds. If I can have an opinion, they may also have one. People care so much about the 2nd ammendment, but they will surrender the 1rst at the drop of an opinion.

"they strain at a gnat, but swallow the camel"

-- R. Wright (, May 06, 1999.

If you're inspired by Decker, that's your problem and, yes, your business. Of course, he can have an opinion and he does. Did I say he can't? I'm sick of saying, "everyone is free to post here." OF COURSE THEY ARE. Hypocrites are entitled to opinions, indeed, that's all they have to offer. But I don't have to scrape Decker's feet and kiss them.

Other than misunderstanding my basic point, I agree with almost everything else you said.

-- BigDog (, May 06, 1999.


No idea who Decker is, but....did you say you were a Christian?


-- pamela (, May 06, 1999.


I took the point to be Decker has a hidden agenda. Everbody has an agenda whether it's visable or not. If his agenda is to "sustain alarm" than so be it. I need someone like Decker to post to get the 360. If I read only one opinion I have chosen to close my mind.

One more thing. "We are simply drawing different conclusions from the same data." I want to know what the other conclusions are!

-- R. Wright (, May 06, 1999.

Pamela yes BD is a Christian in the best sense of the word - Decker crossed the line, the word "betrayal" comes to mind, sometimes the gloves have to come off, BD has just removed his, I admire his restraint as he's had a lot of dealings with the "Gentleman" Decker.

-- Andy (, May 06, 1999.

Dear "BigDog" and Andy,

Fuck you.


-- NOT Mr. Decker (fuqu2@ss.holes), May 06, 1999.

BD & Andy: (BD, at least you should understand these since you've read them before:)

Let the dead bury their dead. (Let's move on. Focus.)

Let the tares grow up with the wheat. Try to cut them out, and you'll cut down the good crop growing. We'll sort them out when the harvest comes.

Trying to filter all the a-holes out of your way, especially as pre- millennial tension grows? Forget it -- forget them -- don't feed the trolls!

-- jor-el (, May 06, 1999.

Or maybe it's that episode of Star Trek when the Warrior Madness invades the Enterprise and takes over its crew, turning them into combative enemies and nearly destroying them.

The real enemy, of course, is watching them to see whether they succumb to the Warrior Madness, or fight it off.

-- jor-el (, May 06, 1999.

Well, now. that's interesting. NIce knee jerk, BD. We would consider those reflexes "Brisk" in my other field. Unfortunately, I have a slightly different take on this. Partly because I am not involved in the heat of the discussion. One of the things that Decker DID do was to reawaken my need for DATA and SPECIFICS. This is NOT A BAD THING in my opinion.

Realizing that you got caught in the whipsaw, I can understand where you may be coming from (some day let me tell you about being betrayed in Lodge). Do TRY for some perspective and balance. I find it interesting that you translate the post as a report on an attempt to destroy the forum. I didn't read that into it. While I DO believe there are some out there who might be working to do just this here, I really don't see Decker as doing so.

If you remember, when he was asked questions, we got answers. We also got specific takes, which we pretty much ascribed to non- militant pollyism. I can't see how this is or was an attempt to destroy what is here. As I have said before in regards Maria nad Flint, I enjoy having to challenge my assumptions and my points against their points. It makes the resultant position that much stronger. BTW it takes a risk taker to actually engage in dialog or intelectual challenges. Never know the outcome if you have an open mind.

we are in MUCH more danger of destruction from posts like the Dutchman's on the power thread. It serves our purpose to look at facts, at opinions offered by people who have the experience to back their opinion up in the field in which the opinion is offered. Having Decker, Flint, Hoff around forces us to be specific in what we say. ONLY in this way can we make inteligent, rational determinations about what we will or will not do for preps.

Take a DEEP breath, and please show me where I have erred?? Because I think that the forum is STRONGER for having Decker's input, and I encourage him to continue, the same way he has up 'til now.

BTW All you needed to do to maintain your OWN intelectual honesty was to post a link with your responses.

Chuck, who does have some nomex undies around here somewhere.

-- chuck, a Night Driver (, May 06, 1999.

Chuck, I agree in principle with most of what you say. BUT. I read Double Decker's motive as an exercise in carefully formulating just the right questions to obtain information with which to debunk any GI theory or opinion. It's one thing to be genuinely interested in learning about another's opinions; it's quite another to make a deliberate and concerted effort to winkle out as much information as possible solely to formulate impenetrable arguments and gloat about it with one's sniggering sycophants. It's dishonorable in the extreme; it's not clever or intelligent. This is JUST the sort of arrogance that got us into this mess in the first place and we don't need it here. That's it, I'm not wasting another second on this abhorrent little episode or its supercilious perpetrator.

-- Old Git (, May 06, 1999.

What does it matter if Mr. Decker posts his opinions somewhere else? He said up front his first post here was swiped from another site. Is this a club?

-- Helen (, May 06, 1999.


Big Dog,

I know whatever I say will be twisted and spun... just like my "Debunker" post. I speak up for the enlightened pessimists on a "hostile" forum and I am Benedict Decker? (laughter)

This is just a "bum's rush," Big Dog, and I hope the level-headed see it as such. Since my first post, you have had a bone to pick with me. You refuse to discuss Y2K. Your lightweight counter argument consists of "I am right, Decker, and you are wrong." So, now, question my character and push me "out the door?" Try to read my "Debunker" post with a little less anger in your heart. Oh, let me pass on one final bit of advice. Where I am from, you call a man cowardly and he'll find out if you have a bit to go along with that bark.

To everyone else....

Do you think I am so dull as not to think there are reader of both fora? When I was posting on BFI--and you are free to read my old posts--I had a distinctive, tongue-in-check style. One reader called it Charles Emerson Winchester III. When I said I was "encouraged" it was this type of light sarcasm. Who, in heaven's name, could be encouraged by being called an idiot or a moron?

My post with all the "No's" is a definitive rant. Guilty as charged. But it was also a summary of points I do not think have been adequately rebutted... the same points that have been raised on fora including BFI and Debunker. It was easier to cut and past than rewrite. (All writing, by the way, is "work.")

Yes, I think there are fanatics here. Sorry, but I have read some posts that are, in my opinion, over the top. I do not believe in black helicopters, the New World Order, government-wide conspiracies or secret plans for martial law.

Hey, folks, I do not believe you need to paint yourself maroon and gold to support the Washington Redskins. PLEASE note that I did not say every pessimist is a fanatic.

Moving forward, nothing gets Big Dog and his cronies more upset than taking them lightly. (Although if you read his response to my posts, it is exactly what he does with me.) If I were a survivalist, I would find the KIA ads disheartening... the same disappointment Christian feel when the media pokes fun at religion. (You remember that feeling, don't you, Big Dog?)

The point of my "Debunker" post--I think the Y2K issue is losing steam. I also predicted a surge of renewed interest in the fall, and even mentioned an October stock market correction. I said that I found some pessimist's worth reading.

This is what has you carrying torches and pitchforks? (laughter)

This thread is not about what I wrote, but what people suspect are my motives... my "true colors." My integrity needs no defense. Not here. Not today. Not from those who hide behind the walls of anonymity. If you want to take my measure, just stop by the house. I'll put coffee on, or even cook supper if you stay on. I may, however, expect better manners than I have seen here on occasion.

I have tried to answer legitimate questions from pessmists on subjects like firearms, camping equipment, etc. I have tried to stay on topic and encourage critical thinking. (Stan Faryna calls it deconstructing, but for a good cigar, I'll forgive him.)

Read my debunker post without the Big Dog editorial comments. Then read my first real post, Y2K and Risk... it's buried on the General Awareness archive.


-- Mr. Decker (, May 06, 1999.

Folks, I've corresponded by email with Mr. Decker, both on the Y2K topic and several others. His style changes not one whit, regardless of the subject of discussion.

He enjoys a spirited debate. He is a middle of the road type person, and appears to be personally quite conservative. I am quite sure he and I could be friends if we were geopgraphically closer, despite different backgrounds.

Let the debates continue. They are much better than the vitriol.

-- Jon Williamson (, May 06, 1999.

Thank you for expressing your opinions. IMO, Decker's post as quoted above is self-revealing and self-explanatory.

-- BigDog (, May 06, 1999.

now i'm confused.

i used to have a pretty fair feel for where i stood on this forum, but in this thread and a few others i'm beginning to wonder.

i'm an ex-programmer, i used to code using an assumed century. that was years ago, and i'm pretty certain that code is no longer in use. that said, i can personally verify, from experience, how difficult it is to re-write code to modify a field size, and even more importantly, how almost impossible it is to find every place in large systems affected by any individual field.

i'm also very much aware of how pervasive computers are in our lives, and the effect a small error can have as it ricochets around inside a system. multiply that by the number of interconnected systems in place today, and you have a recipe for disaster.

i'm a GI. have been as soon as i started thinking about it. can't quite convince my wife of the seriousness of it (she thinks i've gone overboard, and i don't have a fraction stored compared to some of you on this forum), but i'm still working on her. i'm taking this very very seriously.

however, apparently i fall somewhere short of the position expressed by many other GI's here.

i think the Kia ads are hilarious. yeah, they're spoofing canned meat and bank runs, but it's just a car commercial. what it tells me is that more and more people recognize the term y2k, and i think that's good.

i also appreciate mr. decker's posts. i don't appreciate some of the other polly posts, but that's strictly due to their use of foul language. needless to say, that groups some of the doomers into the posts i do not appreciate, also.

don't sweat the small stuff, folks. ignore the idiots. they're just not worth the time and energy with the events we've got on the horizon. glean everything useful from all of the posts, and forget the useless stuff.

as i've said before, every post enriches this forum: it's just that some are sunshine and some are manure.

thanx to ed and greenspun and anyone else who keeps this show on the road for the ability to stand on my soapbox for just a few short minutes of your time.

love and peace to you all.

-- Cowardly Lion (, May 06, 1999.

I think that you ALL have too much time on your hands!!! If you are out building a solar oven, or a bush oven, or a hen house, or cleaning the stalls at a horse farm for the manure for your garden, hoeing weeds, mending fences, trimming goats feet, worming and vaccinating the critter, cleaning the rabbit hutch and the hen house, Cutting, splitting and stacking firewood, getting the garden ready to plant, learning to make cheese and yogurt from your goat's milk, making chicken feed, learning how to throw a diamond 8 hitch, gut a chicken, castrate and dehorn a baby goat, can meat and veggies, dry garlic and onions, make ketchup and mayonaise and jerky, smoke a ham (after you raised and butchered the hog), winnow grain and grind it and make bread that doesn't make good door stops,taken a first aid class and getting your preps all wouldn't have the time and energy for the sqabbles that go on on this forum. All the ranting and raving in the world and asking for proof of this and that, isn't going to feed or prepare your family. And for you who are on the forum from are stealing time from your employer and have no business here until you are on your own time. And don't tell me your aren't doing this. At 7:30 am I can get on the forum. At 8:03 its too busy. Then at lunch time its the same, but thats YOUR TIME. But I swear everyone quits working and hits the forum from work by 3:30. Don't mind me, I am in a somber (spelled bitchey) mood this am. I am the neighborhood y2k/medical expert and had to just go to the neighbors and pronounce a man dead....a very nice man and a GI who left his wife prepared for y2k.


-- Taz (Tassie, May 06, 1999.

Taz -- Since I own my my business, can I be online during the day? Terribly sorry to hear about your neighbor. Now, I better get back to painting the greenhouse ....

Cowardly Lion -- Everyone is different and taking a different approach. I value your approach.

-- BigDog (, May 06, 1999.

Taz, our sympathy; that can be unsettling. Many more people exiting now than previously. Obits take 2 1/2 pages; last year 1/2 page at this time. Makes us wonder.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (, May 06, 1999.

Taz, my sympathy also. i know that's rough. i had a co-worker die in the office next to mine a year ago. i got to the scene late, but pumped the guy's chest while the emt's got setup and did their best. lost him anyway, though. again, sorry.

Big Dog, have you done any more on your 'intentional technology' line?

-- Cowardly Lion (, May 06, 1999.

CL -- yes, I'm working on the Intentional Technology stuff, will be done with first draft I won't post it on the forum, because it's turning out to have a relatively strong religious dimension (as a piece of it, not the whole thing). Would be delighted to send it to you if you can give me an email. I'm also thinking of asking someone to post it on a more suitable forum or perhaps opening up another Greenspun forum that is passworded.

Thanks for asking.

-- BigDog (, May 06, 1999.

BD, I'd like to look at your Intentional Tech piece, too. If you don't post at Pastor Chris's forum, please e me at the given address (unless alpha flu strikes, it's always right).

-- Tricia the Canuck (, May 06, 1999.

Mr Decker says ---- Where I am from, you call a man cowardly and he'll find out if you have a bit to go along with that bark.

BEWARE BIG DOG !!! It sounds like where he's from they ride Big Dogs pretty hard. Wonder if they put you away wet too? Think they use an Gringo saddle and tether and such. Gee, I hope for your sake they don't use.........SPURS !!!!!

-- spun@lright (, May 06, 1999.


couldn't say whether or not you're a coward, since you've had no opportunity to display anything resembling courage. I do however personally think you are a dissembler and intentional deceiver...and in case you're interested I, for one, most assuredly DO have a bite to go with my bark.

Arlin Adams

-- Arlin H. Adams (, May 06, 1999.


I call Montana home, although I am currently an expatriate living in the eastern U.S. Yes, we still use spurs and folksy expressions. It also a place where rough-and-tumble rules still apply.


Where to begin? According to a previous post on this forum, you are an "officer" in some quasi-military organization. If this was a false post, I apologize.

I served my time in the U.S. military and have little patience for someone who does not know me prattling on about courage. I earned my citizenship the hard way, friend.

Now, about your bite. (laughter) I could use the exercise if you want to stop by the gym and put on the gloves. Our conversation might be more productive after a few rounds... or at least more respectful. Or were you thinking sawed-off shotguns at five paces? (laughter)

[As an aside, I met one of my good friends after a scuffle in a little bar in the Phillipines. After we traded blows for a time, we settled down and enjoyed a cold beverage.]

Your call, Arlin. Respond here or drop me an email.


-- Mr. Decker (, May 06, 1999.


I did my time in the military as well...long before I became associated with the folks in that news article. If you have a problem with the fact that some of us still take seriously our oath to preserve protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, then that's your problem.

I guess I just have a low tolerance for people making veiled threats at friends. I have tried to show tolerance for your initial posts vis a vis weapons related issues - figuring you were just an egocentric overtrained specialist with a lack of flexibility. Unfortunately the message cross-posted by BD would seem to indicate I shouldn't have given you the benefit of the doubt...after our first exchange I still thought you might just be a slow learner, and hadn't caught on to the fact that you were acting out if ignorance in entirely failing to address the self-defense needs of y2k preparers. I see I was wrong - your failure was, apparently intentional.

Oh, and sorry to decline your invitationI never fought in a boxing ring - learned my fighting in barracks and bars...afraid it wouldn't be fair to you.


-- Arlin H. Adams (, May 06, 1999.

Taz, We will keep you in our thoughts.

Mr. Decker, I once said on this forum that I valued your opinion. Now I can only value your information. For me personally, and I suspect others too who are less vocal on this forum, this single post has done more to disprove any similance of credibility you or the other frequent "pollys" could have ever done in many posts. I do not view y2k as a game, or a contest, or an experiment. How sad it is that you are able to view an event of such significance to so many people around the world, not just we more fortunate ones in USA, in this manner.

In some way though, I think you have done alot to help the "little people" be motivated to prepare as best we can. Big Dog, Andy, Diane, Mr. Carey, chuck,Old Git, and all the other "doomer cronies" as you call them...I may not always agree with them, but at least I know they don't have any alterior motives when I read their posts; leaves the way clear for me to draw my own conclusions freely.

I don't need anymore compeling topics to convience me of the bad news...I hope to find posts telling of good news, but they certainly must be believable and verifiable and not self-serving for either the news sorce or the poster. Either way, I come here for the news.

Don't think so much of the KIA ad or what you have posted here as frustrating us because it is so important that we want you to agree with us. KIA uses y2k to make money, politicians use y2k to get publicity, and you have used y2k for reasons I don't understand beyond that they are self-serving.

Whether you think y2k will be a bump in the road or a major event...PLEASE KEEP PREPARING for the level you feel is necessary!!!

-- Lilly (, May 06, 1999.

Decker -- I assume you could kill me quite quickly with a gun. Maybe even with your hands. So? Your statement about Montana and "courage" is more of the same old stuff. Witty, slick, empty.

"Courage" on the Net has to do with honesty built up over time and the shared perception between honorable people, regardless of the "position" they take on Y2K. Paul Davis, for instance, is about as honest as they come. So is Arlin. You aren't and are lacking in courage.

So shoot me, "Mr" Decker.

-- BigDog (, May 06, 1999.

Gosh, Arlin, you may have to take it easy on me. (laughter) My response to Big Dog was not a threat. It was an observation... if he decides to start dropping words like coward, he may provoke more than harsh language from someone less forgiving than me. In truth, I have no deep-seated desire to brawl, bare knuckled or otherwise. With time, I have learned more peaceful ways to settle disputes. Of course, every so often along comes a "tough guy." In or out of the ring, Arlin, if you want some of me, I'll fax you the directions. Let's keep it legal, though, two gentleman who have decided for a more vigorous exchange of opinions.


-- Mr. Decker (, May 06, 1999.

"Gentleman" (Ha1) decker is an agent provocateur of the most oily kind. His posts today are very revealing. I wouldn't trust him as far as I could spit.

-- Andy (, May 06, 1999.

Big Dog,

When you say shared perception, what you ought to say is people who agree with you. As always, you dress a personal attack up with a few well chosen words and try to pass it off as "the truth." [Please note, Big Dog, that I am questioning what you say, not who you are. It is an important difference.]

Were I dishonest, I could have posted on "Debunker" under a false name. Your interpretation of my post simply opened the door for a frenetic personal attack. With all due respect, you seemed to leap at the opportunity.

By the way, I have no desire to "shoot" you... or even change your mind.


-- Mr. Decker (, May 06, 1999.

"When you say shared perception, what you ought to say is people who agree with you."

Decker -- now you're having problems reading simple, clear English. I said above that Paul Davis and I hardly ever agree, but the shared perception here (I think) is of his honesty, gained over time by Paul and noted by many on this forum. You're 100% wrong about what I said and what I meant.

"Your interpretation of my post simply opened the door for a frenetic personal attack. With all due respect, you seemed to leap at the opportunity."

Wrong again. It wasn't an "interpretation". It also wasn't "frenetic" nor did I "leap" at the opportunity. My strong preference is to discuss and debate with honorable people, whatever their position. I mistakenly thought you were honorable. You are not honorable. Unless you want to keep trying to have the final word, why don't you go post your duplicitous opinions on other threads? Some folks think you're just swell and are looking forward to your "insights".

-- BigDog (, May 06, 1999.

Mr. Decker. I have avoided getting into this fray up until now, but your references to the NWO post as being over the top, and your statement that you do not believe in any NWO conspiracy have left me no option but to engage. Any man of your obvious intelligence and awareness of current events who denies the existence this group and of their agenda is obviously spreading disinformation. Personally I am of the opinion that you are a paid government disinformation agent. Please read the following article and explain to me how this group does not exist.

International power brokers meet to discuss global future

World's most secret society to meet in Sintra

Bilderberg, reputedly the most secretive organisation in the world, comprising presidents, royal families, ministers, top industrialists and financial leaders are set to meet in Sintra at the beginning of June. Francisco Pinto Balsamco, former Portuguese PM, media baron and frequent attendee of the meetings is listed as the member for Portugal. The security for the Bilderberg meetings, which are held at irregular intervals and prompted by the state of world affairs, is the responsibility of the host country. According to sources in Washington, Bilderberg will pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to reimburse the Portuguese government for deploying military forces to guard their privacy and for helicopters to seek out intruders. Bilderberg have ordered the resort to be shut down for a full 48 hours before the conference.

The Bilderberg delegates, comprising some of the world's most powerful decision makers, will be here to discuss highly classified issues which are not supposed to be disclosed to the public by the press before or after the meeting. Initially alerted to this meeting by a New York reader who requested anonymity, The News contacted the Caesar Park Penha Longa resort in Sintra to verify the information that the secret meeting will be held at their resort. The only confirmation we received was that an organization 'wishing for the utmost privacy' would be in Sintra and that the hotel was fully and exclusively booked by this organisation from June 2 to June 7.

The agenda for the meeting is said to include a "globilaztion summit", during which nations which cling tenaciously to their sovereign identities will be denounced by its leadership.

The principal feature of Bilderberg is that it seeks one global government, (a structure similar to the European Union), while counteracting nationalist sentiment is supposedly its greatest battle. Renewed calls for the United Nations to be able to directly tax all people of the world is said to be another major topic to be tabled for discussion in Sintra.

The Bilderberg meetings are only held when and where the hosts can provide the highest levels of security for their guests. All Bilderberg participants, their staff members and resort employees will wear photo identification tags. They will have separate colours to identify the wearer as participant, staff member or employee. A computer chip "fingerprint" will assure the identity of the card's wearer.

According to the Washington based investigative newsletter, Spotlight, who claims to have a contact inside Bilderberg, any intruders are to be manhandled, cuffed and jailed and if the intruders resist arrest or attempt to flee, they will be shot.

International and national media are said to be welcome only when an oath of silence has been taken, news editors are held responsible if any of their journalists 'inadvertently' report on what takes place.

Bilderberg members are immune to all forms of bureaucracy that face ordinary citizens on a daily basis. No visas are required and a free and safe passage is provided by the government hosting the Bilderberg rendezvous. They travel to and from the airport to the resort in armoured vehicles with a police escort.

Meetings are said to be held at random intervals, and rarely at the same locations for obvious security reasons.

The first Bilderberg conference was held in May 1954, and the organization was said to have been established as a secret and supportive wing of NATO and the Marshall plan which was launched in the 1940s.

International conspiracy

The News having researched various sources on the Bilderberg meetings, discovered that PSD co-founder, Francisco Pinto Balsemco, allegedly attended at least the previous two Bilderberg meetings held in Scotland (1998) and Georgia in the United States (1997). Balsemco is said to be the only Portuguese representative on the Bilderberg steering committee. Other prominent figures listed to have attended previous meetings are Ricardo Salgado chief executive officer at Banco Espirito Santo, Henry Kissinger, Tony Blair (who attended the meeting held in 1995) and Giovanni Agnelli who is the owner of the Fiat Motor Corporation.

-- Nikoli Krushev (, May 06, 1999.

is anyone else but me tired of Mr.Deckers(laughter)?

-- Finally (bored@with, May 06, 1999.

Honestly, I have never heard anything about Bilderberg. I'll try some research and see what I can dig up.


-- Mr. Decker (, May 06, 1999.

Decker ... do keep laughing.

Perhaps you wont notice the obvious ... youre transparent.

Rather like that childrens story about the emperor.


-- Diane J. Squire (, May 07, 1999.


Were you planning on actually contributing to the debate... or just writing another new age greeting card post?


-- Mr. Dec ker (, May 07, 1999.

This thread is VERY revealing,

"gentleman" decker (lower case, natch) is sticking around, as is his wont.

It will also be very revealing to see how many Americans (i.e. suckers) he can sweet talk.

Sory to be NOT PC but tht's the way I see it, and so des g decker.

For that is his wont.


-- Andy (, May 07, 1999.

Decker --

"Were you planning on actually contributing to the debate... or just writing another new age greeting card post?"

There is no debate about your intentions. If you were the person you pretend to be (regulars, ponder this if you're still deceived) you wouldn't even be participating on the other forum (I can hear you now, "there goes BigDog trying to .....").

Diane and I disagree about spirituality, as a matter of fact. Profoundly. Big deal. There is more honest, respectful disagreement on this forum than anywhere I've seen on the Net. BIFFY and its offspring permit NO disagreement, you hypocrite.

Point: Diane has been contributing MEANINGFULLY to the debate here for months and months.

(laughter, rolling on the floor, shaking my head in amazement)

-- BigDog (, May 07, 1999.

In case you missed my resonse on another thread.

"Big Dog,

I am not sure how you managed the Great Books program when you seem to have such difficulty reading my posts. MBA Diane took a poke at me, so I poked back at her spacey writing style. Her WRITING. You seem to have an incredible difficulty separating attacking someone's work and attacking someone. For example, calling someone a hypocrite, a coward or a liar is a personal attack. Yes, I can see where my use of the word Christian might needle you. I will avoid applying the word to you in the future.

Stan Faryna posted at Debunker yesterday and lived to tell the tale. I have been a "moderate" on every forum and my work on BFI was generally respected because it was logical, balanced and well reasoned.

If you'll notice, some of the reasonable moderates on this forum (like Faryna and Florence) do not always agree with my work, but they reject your interpretation of my motives. If you respect Mr. Faryna, Mr. Florence or the others who have spoken on my behalf, perhaps you should reconsider your incessant cat calls. On the other hand, you and Andy can make it your mission in life to rant every time I post. In the long run, however, I think your credibility will be damaged if you continue a series of gratuitous personal attacks.

The notion that I would not visit BFI if I were an honorable person is ludicrous. I reject it as a thought police tactic of the lowest sort. I also reject Gary North and Christian Reconstructionism as seditionary. North's use of Y2K has been a sham. His published goal is an overthrow of the Republic and establishment of a theocracy. Y2K is just the latest method. We can debate this any time you wish.

"Don't give me that baloney about how you tell them not to "ridicule" SOME of us. (laugher, rolling on the floor at Decker, shaking my head in amazement)"

It's good to see you still have your sense of humor."

By the way, why don't you cut-and-paste the best of Diane in a new post so we can review her work.

-- Mr. Decker (, May 07, 1999.


Decker's dissension, is quite evident. Look at how he "attacks" without seeming to.

Must be an old habit with him.


(Read the archives, D)

-- Diane J. Squire (, May 07, 1999.

shame on you decker - first you try to cover up your threat to BD, and then you mistake yourself for a gentleman...*tsk* that's two for two guy, and no sale on either one. You're really not very good at lying, even with all the practice you're getting around here.

Nice to see that at least you didn't try to claim you weren't intentionally misleading people on firearms issues. Of course that was your mistake, but then you're starting to slip up a bit...gotta watch that sort of thing decker - if you're not careful you might tell the truth about something that really could be humorous.

Arlin Adams

-- Arlin H. Adams (, May 07, 1999.


This is rich. The psyops officer in a quasi-military brigade is now giving truth lectures. Despite his rants, I think Big Dog is a gentle soul. Heck, he is squeamish about butchering a hog. I have no desire to bully a man of peace.

Oh, would love to hear from you.


-- Mr. Decker (, May 07, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ