Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 10 Nov 2006 14:17 <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:RhR4h.6436$yl4.3778(a)newssvr12.news.prodigy.com... > > "Ben Newsam" <ben.newsam(a)ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message > news:28d7l29uofp8nriijbl2h4mvntbaqrvei4(a)4ax.com... >> >>> <...> the police can stop and search on the most tenuous basis, if >>>you are even slightly suspected of a "terrorist" related offence you can >>>be >>>detained for days without legal counsel (etc.). >> >> They wouldn't do that in the USA would they? Ah no, they do it in Cuba >> instead and pretend it's the USA. Unless it is more convenient to say >> it's Cuba, of course. And it's years there, not days... > > I remember once in college, about 25 years ago, the cops pulled me over > late one night well outside of town, asked to see my driver's license and > registration, shone his flashlight into the back seat of my car, then said > "Sorry, we're looking for a car like yours that was involved in a crime." > Sounded pretty flimsy to me--either they didn't like the look of me, > thought I was drunk, etc. I checked the newspaper the next day--no crime > was listed that could possibly have been what he was talking about. I was > slightly annoyed, but if the police want to come up with some reason to > stop you and question you, they will, no matter what the rules. I would > have been a helluva lot more annoyed if he'd asked to search my car...but > then I would have gotten belligerent and demanded a warrant. They don't need a warrant in the UK. A young work colleague of mine was pulled over in London and had his car and body searched. The police stated they smelt marijuana coming from the car (they were in a van with the windows closed and it was raining) and during questioning the office noticed an offensive weapon in the passenger door well - it was a 3" screwdriver in a tool kit. What a great world.
From: unsettled on 10 Nov 2006 14:24 T Wake wrote: > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > news:ej234l$8qk_015(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > >>In article <455368BB.5A9A6A6C(a)hotmail.com>, >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>> >>> >>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>> >>>>> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>And the first reason is going to become ubiquitous as industry is less >> >>and >> >>>>>>less willing to pay for the health care of its employees. >>>>> >>>>>Industry can't afford it. >>>> >>>>Yes, you are correct. It doesn't change the fact that the number of >> >>people >> >>>>actually having effective health insurance under the current system in >>>>this >>>>country is rapidly decreasing toward a limit of zero. >>> >>>Something similar is happening here wrt pensions too. >>> >>>I don't think private companies are up to the task of providing critical >>>services like this very well. >> >>Ours are, too. That's because the pensions are transforming >>from a collected pot of money by the employees into an insurance >>policy. It's no longer real money. >> >>The same thing happened to medical pots of money contributed >>by employees and their employers. The pool of monies got transformed >>to insurance companies. > > > Which is why a state run system is "better." Part of the problem in the UK > is our pensions got "privatised" and the providers have to turn a profit. You don't understand anything about this business then. Life insurance companies also sell annuities. Those are left hand - right hand businesses. Whether an individual lives or dies at any particular age, they make a modest profit on the money they handle. When they achieve the correct ratio of products sold they're not at risk. It is a competitive business which is what regulates their profits. State run annuities experience only expenses so there's no reasonable measure of their effectiveness.
From: T Wake on 10 Nov 2006 14:27 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ej23es$8qk_017(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <B8ednfD6YLnR5M7YnZ2dnUVZ8sidnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:eivd0d$8qk_021(a)s839.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <%Ul4h.9702$r12.8296(a)newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, >>> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>> >>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>news:eislgp$8qk_005(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>> In article <45509EF9.BE1B73C6(a)hotmail.com>, >>>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote >>>>>>> ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message. >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> My state is going to have an all Democrat political system with >>>>>>> >> no checks nor balances. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >....and yet somehow you completely fail to see how unhealthy that >>>>>>> >has >>>>>>> >been >>>>>>> >for the entire country. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You do need to learn about Consitution. There are checks and >>>>>>> balances working. >>>>>> >>>>>>Bush has been busy removing some of them. >>>>> >>>>> He can't. His powers are checked by the legislature and judicial >>>>> branches of our government. >>>> >>>>In an ideal world, yes. However, you'd better open your eyes, because >>>>Bush >>>>has been slowly dismantling a number of the checks-and-balances that the >>>>Constitution sets up. Wiretaps without warrants issued by the Judicial >>>>branch is one example. >>> >>> The last I heard that classification of wiretapping was checked >>> by judiciary. >>> >>>> There are several others that I can't think of right >>>>now because I'm tired and my memory is worthless before noon. >>> >>> Night owl. :-) I'm the opposite. Anti-Bushers like to trot >>> this wire tapping thing out to prove that he is a bad person. >>> It was part of the Patriot Act. >> >>The Patriot Act was not a "Good Thing(tm)." > > That's why Congress wrote in an expiration date. Doing a bad thing for a "short" time is still bad.
From: T Wake on 10 Nov 2006 14:30 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ej1rq5$8qk_002(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <45535A1F.F229D5D9(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >Islamic societies are based on law. It is a law which uses the Koran >>> >> >as >>> >> >its guide rather than the Bible but it is still law. >>> >> >>> >> And that law is currently being interpreted so that all people >>> >> who are not Muslim must be killed. >>> > >>> >No it's not. That is a complete fallacy. >>> >>> You haven't been listening to the extremists, then. >> >>There's no point 'listening' to ppl like that. You simply can't take that > stuff >>seriously. > > People, who have a goal of killing you and yours, are not to > be taken seriously? That's not how I work at all. > >> >> >>> I did not say that *all* of Islam has this interpretation. >>> It doesn't, yet. But it's only a matter of years before >>> extremists of all kinds will have weapons that can interrupt >>> and destroy the world's trade. >> >>That's utterly ridiculous ! > > You are ignoring the current nuclear bomb arms race that is > happening in the Middle East. What kind of reaction will > the Arabs have when Iran has bigger weapons than they do? >> >>Say what you mean exactly instead of making vague allusions. > > I don't think I've been vague at all. You have. >> >> >>> Do you want to prevent this mess from happening or wait until >>> it's in your lap. If you choose the latter, not only will >>> you have the work to clean up the mess, you will also have >>> additional work of trying to prevent it from happening again-- >>> which will be impossible. >> >>The best way to avoid a 'mess' is to behave intelligently and avoid >>provoking >>hostility. > > You are considered to be the equivalent of vermin in a certain > interpretation of the Koran. You do not merit hositility since > that would give you an equal standing. I am considered vermin in certain interpretations of the Bible. Does this mean we need to wage a War on Christianity?
From: T Wake on 10 Nov 2006 14:31
<jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ej1t38$8qk_002(a)s995.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <45535C91.5F6C3E61(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >unsettled wrote: >>> >> Lloyd Parker wrote: >>> >> > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>> >>> >> > Yeah, like a few million more Kurds is just what Turkey needs. >>> >> >>> >> I don't know what Turkey will do. I am the messenger. >>> > >>> >Turkey will do what they're told to do or lose out big time. >>> >>> Oh, the irony. >> >>The EU has a very big carrot and a very big stick. > > The carrot has worms and the stick has termites. Really? How do you come to this conclusion? > That makes them useless to be used for their original purpose. Which was? |