Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: lucasea on 10 Nov 2006 00:43 "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message news:ej12i5$ms1$4(a)blue.rahul.net... > In article <9bf85$4553faee$4fe76f5$27174(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>Ken Smith wrote: >> >>Nothing > > Oh, I guess your news reader messed up. As a public service, I'll post > you another copy so you can read it. Now *that* was funny. I think I'll leave it in here too. Eric Lucas > In article <ej0t6q$gct$4(a)blue.rahul.net>, > Ken Smith <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote: >>In article <891f7$455158d2$49ecf6c$10929(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>>Ken Smith wrote: >>[....] >>>> Inventing some "golden age" in the past and claiming your aim is to >>>> restore it is a very common propaganda trick. The so called "christian >>>> right" does this all the time. >>> >>>Perhaps you're citing the Democrats who keep talking about >>>"change" without saying what that is. It seems to be a trick >>>with some results in today's elections. >> >>Here we go gain. If I wasn't so lazy I'd go find the links and post them. >>I seriously doubt that you have been living in a cave for the last year so >>you will have already heard the democrats explain what they mean by >>change. >> >>> >> Claiming that some popular hero in the past held the views you are >>>> advocating is also a common trick. Albert Einstein said that he really >>>> hated people who do this. >>> >>>"He who joyfully marches to music rank and file, has already >>>earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, >>>since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice. This >>>disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. >>>Heroism at command, how violently I hate all this, how >>>despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to >>>shreds than be a part of so base an action. It is my conviction >>>that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of >>>murder." >>> >>>"Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome >>>nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism -- how passionately >>>I hate them!" >>> >>>http://www.heartquotes.net/Einstein.html >>> >>>Elsewhere I ran into some comment about his hatred of his >>>high school. >>> >>>Seems you've misappropriated Einstein for your own ends. There >>>weren't very many things the man hated. No doubt you'd have >>>qualified. >> >>I'm going to leave all of the above in place so that others can read it >>again and marvel. I used a bit humor to make a point about propaganda and >>you not only miss the point, you blathered on and on highlighting your >>misunderstanding. >> >> >> >>>Without Einstein the atomic bomb would have come later, so his >>>part in it killed a *lot* of people under the guise of war. >>>The fact is he and his lot wanted to drop the bomb on Europe, >>>but that war ended without it, leaving only the Pacific War >>>and Japan to on which to expend the bombs he helped to create. >>> >>>Your hot button post is devoid of substance. It only has >>>meaning to lemming followers where you're a popular figure. >> >>ROFLMAO You really don't get it do you? > -- > -- > kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge >
From: Ken Smith on 10 Nov 2006 00:44 In article <p4U4h.2003$6t.1409(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: [.....] >Well posted, but you didn't read the translation I gave you: >"anti-American" = "dare to question the power-mongers who use fear to get >people to hand over their rights". I'm sure you'll be declared >anti-American as a result, and probably have a few other insults hurled at >you. It's the way they win unwinnable arguments. No, they don't win. To win an argument is to convince others. It need not be the person making the counter points you convince. If in a debate two people make their best arguments, neither changes their mind but the 100 people watching all agree that one side has proven their point, that side has won the argument. So long as you make well thought out arguments, you are likely to win the argument against those who only hurl insults. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: lucasea on 10 Nov 2006 00:45 "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message news:ej1399$ms1$6(a)blue.rahul.net... > In article <455407DE.DA4262ED(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>Ken Smith wrote: >> >>> In article <45535A63.7B55EF05(a)hotmail.com>, >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> [....] >>> >> The fact that you perceive none exists is due to our >>> >> Democrat leadership undermining those policies. The basis of >>> >> their yapping is the assumption that the threat doesn't exist. >>> > >>> >There is no real *threat* ! >>> >>> That statement is not right. There are many many real threats. >>> Fixating >>> on a minor one and ignoring the more important ones is what has really >>> happened. >> >>Do you consider Islam to be a real threat to the USA ? > > Radical Islam, I think, really belongs somewhat above being attacked by > giant mutant squids and a long way below N. Korea. There you go again, trying to use fear to rob the giant mutant squids of their Constitutional rights. Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 10 Nov 2006 00:46 "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message news:ej13ke$ms1$7(a)blue.rahul.net... > In article <p4U4h.2003$6t.1409(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > [.....] >>Well posted, but you didn't read the translation I gave you: >>"anti-American" = "dare to question the power-mongers who use fear to get >>people to hand over their rights". I'm sure you'll be declared >>anti-American as a result, and probably have a few other insults hurled at >>you. It's the way they win unwinnable arguments. > > No, they don't win. To win an argument is to convince others. It need > not be the person making the counter points you convince. If in a debate > two people make their best arguments, neither changes their mind but the > 100 people watching all agree that one side has proven their point, that > side has won the argument. > > So long as you make well thought out arguments, you are likely to win the > argument against those who only hurl insults. Yep, that was kind of my point. Eric Lucas
From: Ken Smith on 10 Nov 2006 00:53
In article <YlU4h.2013$6t.1785(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: [... me ....] >> Radical Islam, I think, really belongs somewhat above being attacked by >> giant mutant squids and a long way below N. Korea. > >There you go again, trying to use fear to rob the giant mutant squids of >their Constitutional rights. ..... but .... but ... you really don't understand. They hate us for our eating calamari. They are trying to organize the shrimp. They will take away your light-tomato broth seasoned with basil. They hate your crusty bread and the lobster tongs. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge |