Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 23 Nov 2006 14:46 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:45651F6A.7DF501BD(a)hotmail.com... > > > unsettled wrote: > >> T Wake wrote: >> >> > A kid I know has worked at McDonalds for two years and is still a >> > selfish, >> > self centred idiot with no concept of the value of money, nor the >> > social >> > responsibilities that go with being an adult. He wouldn't know how to >> > save >> > for a pair of socks, let alone the future. He is a blight on society >> > despite >> > being 20 years old and having worked since he left school. >> > >> > Just shows anecdotal evidence can cut both ways. >> >> What is shows is that T.Wake believes most people >> need keepers, hence Marxist socialism. > > Good Lord ! > > Talk about leaping to conclusions ! Yeah, I don't think he needs a keeper. I think he should be deported and some other country should worry about him. Unsettled is not capable of the reading comprehension of a six year old, so it is no surprise he repeated jumps to incorrect conclusions. He cant help himself, he really is not capable of anything else.
From: T Wake on 23 Nov 2006 14:47 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:45658EA3.4AE5B3B9(a)hotmail.com... > > > 'foolsrushin' wrote: > >> Homer J Simpson wrote: >> >> > "Gordon" <gordonlr(a)DELETEswbell.net> wrote in message >> > news:00c0i29vn31ejl71pku1d0r1nfaevj6p4i(a)4ax.com... >> >> > >>So you are saying they are NOT better Xtians than everyone else? >> >> > > No, I'm saying that this war on terrorism started long before >> > > President Bush and the present Republican administration was >> > > involved in any way. >> >> > But it isn't a war. It is a problem for a police force that requires >> > international cooperation, something the US is notoriously unable or >> > unwilling to be involved in. >> >> Bush and 'Boy Blair' poked a nest of hornets, and now we all have to >> live with the consequences. Probably the intention was to stir up the >> guys to get at their oil, but the miscalculation was that this was a >> political issue: probably, whoever thermited the Towers, there was no >> recognition that there would be nobody to negotiate with and >> conversely, universal Islamic protest, with a highly significant number >> of them flying into a scattered self-sacrificial rage. The next and >> silly step was to declare war on 'terrorism', effectively inventing > > Oh no ! > > Not a conspiracy theorist who believes the towers were thermited ? news://sci.physics is full of the nutters.
From: Eeyore on 23 Nov 2006 14:50 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > hill(a)rowland.org wrote: > >Eeyore wrote: > >> Winfield Hill wrote: > >>> Google Groups is having a little trouble with this long thread. > >>> The message-heading list said there were 9999 posts, so > >>> I hoped to make the 10,000th post, but upon loading all the > >>> article references in the left sidebar, it showed more than > >>> 10,050 posts, so I missed the opportunity. > >> > >> Yes, we've found a flaw with google groups. > >> > >> The summary page seems incapable of displaying any number > 10,000 ! > >> The honour of the 10,000th post goes to T Wake btw. > > > > Well, Graham, actually it has you as # 10,000 right now. > > But the number is volatile and it'll change as soon as > > someone posts higher up in the list, pushing the rest down. > > Try this test of their software: See if you can access and read the > first couple of posts in this thread. It has no trouble with that at all. Graham
From: Eeyore on 23 Nov 2006 15:06 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> >In comparison the US system fails to deliver as much at a far greater > >> >cost. > >> > >> You are comparing a mom and pop store with a conglomerate. > > > >In population terms the USA's only 5 times bigger. Similar schemes to the NHS > >exist all over Europe with a far greater population than the USA. > > But dispersed over the equivalent of 50 countries, each with its > own sets of rules. In your country everybody agrees to one set. > This is not true in the US. The one-rule set is very limited in > power. I can see that the position of the individual states may complicate things a bit. I wouldn't have thought this would be insuperable though. Graham
From: Eeyore on 23 Nov 2006 15:15
T Wake wrote: > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>unsettled wrote: > >> > >>> NHS has not > >>> yet withstood the test of time. Wake me up in a few more > >>> decades. > >> > >>60 years is enough to prove the point imho. > > > > You still have a private system in place. So the NHS > > does not work to the exclusion of other methods. > > Well spotted - it is called patient choice. The NHS is there for everyone in > the UK. Those who choose to have things like nicer carpets in their hospital > room can choose to go private. > > In a different post you are calling the NHS a monopoly and saying it removes > choice. As you can see, neither claim is true. A classic example of the mixed economy in fact. Graham |