Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 4 Oct 2006 05:38 In article <eg66i2tu83m9he0stj9l8l0kdpulpc7s6d(a)4ax.com>, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 18:00:17 +0100, "T Wake" ><usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> >>"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >>news:grs2i25e29m02qt6takp6sfpoi0snt838s(a)4ax.com... >>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 19:56:34 +0100, "T Wake" >>> <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>news:45214B1B.7A9DD9AD(a)earthlink.net... >>>>> Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I've seen very few French tourists here in AZ... probably because >>>>>> they'd be shunned ;-) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The ones I've met in Florida were quite rude, and about as ignorant >>>>> as the donkey. They think we owe them a huge favor because they came >>>>> here to harass us. :( >>>> >>>>All French people are rude. That is why no one likes them. Even the French >>>>don't like themselves. >>>> >>> >>> I drove around France for six weeks once. The people in cities were >>> often rude, and the people in small towns and in the countryside were >>> almost always cheerful and friendly. In the US, I find city and >>> country people mostly friendly, without a big difference. >> >>Oddly, I agree. I often visit the US and invariably people are polite and >>friendly. I avoid rural France for fear of the Guillotine... >> >>> I think the rudest place I've been was Moscow... glories of Socialism >>> and all that. >> >>Not been to Moscow, most Former Soviet countries tend to be quite polite >>though. Maybe the Russians took the breakdown worse than the rest... >> > >I spent a month in Moscow towards the end of the Breshnev regime, >while it was still the USSR. I have friends there (my friend Sergei >owns the biggest independent automatic transmission repair operation >in Russia, I think) and they say things are a lot better lately. Good. There's rarely any reports about all this stuff. >I >have no desire to go back. > >The Russians don't understand queues. If there's a cash register, >everybody crowds around and pushes in. When a elevator opens, >everybody outside rushes in from all directions and everybody inside >pushes their way out, all at the same time. That wasn't my impression when we spent a day in Leningrad (I can't remember its name was when we went). Could this be a regional custom or were we visiting on an off day? /BAH
From: Eeyore on 4 Oct 2006 06:44 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > JoeBloe <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: > > > Essentially a stupid jerk is all he amounts to. > > Let him be one. He is merely doing the popular action in > blaming the US to assuage his fear. I have no fear of these issues. It's the damn Americans who are afraid you clot ! Graham
From: Eeyore on 4 Oct 2006 06:46 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >"T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message > >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > >>> T Wake wrote: > >>>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > >>>> > >>>> > This mess is about changing a mindset; either Western civilization's > >>>> > mindset is changed or religious extremists' mindset is changed. > >>>> > >>>> I agree completely. > >>> > >>> How about removing the either and replacing the or with and ? > >> > >> Also an option. Any one of those three will work. > > > >I think the mutual concession option > > This option does not exist. You can't accept that Islam isn't a threat to your lifestyle ? Graham
From: jmfbahciv on 4 Oct 2006 05:44 In article <v6CUg.52$45.146(a)news.uchicago.edu>, mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >In article <eftbpt$8ss_008(a)s888.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>In article <MeqUg.46$45.147(a)news.uchicago.edu>, >> mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>In article <eft89f$20j$1(a)news.al.sw.ericsson.se>, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen" >><frithiof.jensen(a)die_spammer_die.ericsson.com> writes: >>>> >>>><mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message >>>>news:4ngUg.37$45.164(a)news.uchicago.edu... >>>>> In article <g8OdnRoTOcYdo7zYRVnyiw(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" >>>><usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> writes: >>>>> > >>>>> ><mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message >>>>> >news:g0%Tg.10$45.93(a)news.uchicago.edu... >>>>> > >>>>> >> >>>>> >> As I said, you're thinking way too small. And, too parochial. The >>>>> >> belief that other people are just reacting to what we do, not acting >>>>> >> on their own plans and ideas, is touching, but not anchored in >>>>> >> reality. It is a pleasant belief, no doubt, since it presents us with >>>>> >> the illusion of control, with the sense that ultimately all that's >>>>> >> happening depends only on what we do, thus we just have to find the >>>>> >> proper mode of behavior and everything will be great. A pleasant >>>>> >> illusion, but no more than this. >>>>> >> >>>>> > >>>>> >So, if the West's actions have no impact on the behaviour of the >>"opponent," >>>>> >how can the war be won? Your post implies that nothing we [tinw] can do >>will >>>>> >change their behaviour. >>>>> > >>>>> We did change the behavior of Germany and Japan, didn't we? >>>> >>>>At the cost of maybe 20% of the German population - which clearly noone is >>>>willing to pay yet in the middle east; mainly because it would look really >>bad >>>>on TeeVee. If one is not going to fight for real and destroy the opponents >>there >>>>is really, really no point in sending soldiers. >>> >>>Well, so here is the situation. As Clausevitz wrote, war doesn't end >>>till the spirit of one of the opponents is not broken. Now, the >>>breaking point will depend on the specific nation as well as on the >>>circumstances of the specific war, but based on ample historical data >>>it is somewhere in the vicinity of 10% of the population (give or take >>>factor two for the specific circumstances). But, since we're living >>>in kinder and gentler times", we prefer to ignore the empirical >>>record, and hope, against hope, that somehow, by some miracle, same >>>result can be obtained much cheaper. Now, miracles can be very nice >>>when they happen, but putting trust in them is not very wise. So, >>>yes, I agree with you, absent the readiness to fight for real we're >>>just biding our time. >> >>Clarification, please? A mindset change of a people only needs >>10% of them to change? This doesn't make sense,...unless..... >>it's the intelligensia that has to do the changing. Another >>question, if the answer is yes to the 10% of the population, is >>there a particular sector of workers that have to do the changing? >> >You didn't read carefully. I tried several times; I failed. >It is not "10% changing". It is that >historical data indicates dramatic changes when about 10% of the >population is *dead*. Does this make it clear? Yes. Thank you. [emoticon rolls up piece of paper of possible ideas and places it in the circular file] /BAH
From: Eeyore on 4 Oct 2006 06:49
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: > > >Keith Olbermann had a good commentary a week or two ago about Bush calling a > >criticism "unacceptable." > > Which criticism was unacceptable? Watch this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDg1WclMAfI > I don't understand you people; first you complain that he can't > think for himself; then, you object when he expresses his opinion about > something. Who can't. Graham |