Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 4 Oct 2006 15:26 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4522FA58.7888451(a)hotmail.com... > > > T Wake wrote: > >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote >> >> > It's called realpolitik. >> >> Call it anything you want. It gets in the way of solving the problem. >> >> What would your answer be? > > Go for it. I consider myself a realist. I doubt that all the answers will > be > entirely pure-as-driven-snow 100% ethical, they never are. > The problem is one of history though. For example, we are currently in a situation where people are "getting revenge" for acts carried out against their people by the Oppressor (Palestinians vs Israel for example). As part of this thought experiment we imagine a situation where the "West" decides to enforce a cease fire and forces Israel to give the Palestinians land, coastline, water etc. Now, fast forward 50 years and picture a group of disaffected Israeli boys being whipped into a murderous fervour by a Rabbi who is telling them how the dirty Arabs stole their lands and how they should exact revenge. Off they go, with their guns and kill some Arabs. The cycle continues.
From: Keith on 4 Oct 2006 15:26 In article <452408AA.F58E3945(a)hotmail.com>, rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... > > > "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > > > Keith wrote: > > > > > > Meanwhile, the stuffed donkey will watch the documentary about the > > > wild west, "Blazing Saddles". > > > > He should pay close attention to the scene where someone punches out > > the horse. > > Your American Love of Violence is once again nnoted. > > Do you think that violence is the only way to 'win an argument' ? Perhaps not, but if you're dead you certainly 'lost the argument' (why the single quotes, I have no idea). The Islamists certainly want you to lose the argument. -- Keith
From: Keith on 4 Oct 2006 15:29 In article <eg0vov$s36$2(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu says... > In article <MPG.1f8db882374b5dc7989d6c(a)News.Individual.NET>, > Keith <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > >In article <eg0k2p$e61$1(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu > >says... > >> In article <MPG.1f8d91f2b6b5c0e8989d5f(a)News.Individual.NET>, > >> Keith <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > >> >In article <efugkv$4up$3(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu > >> >says... > >> >> In article <nrc5i2tq8jr4k99aqofmbbesm7em13ktok(a)4ax.com>, > >> >> John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> >On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 18:28:11 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" > >> >> ><nobody(a)nowhere.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >>"Lloyd Parker" <lparker(a)emory.edu> wrote in message > >> >> >>news:eftptn$c8p$2(a)leto.cc.emory.edu... > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> Tell me how many times the Bill of Rights says "people" and how many > >> times > >> >> >>> it > >> >> >>> says "citizens." > >> >> >> > >> >> >>SCOTUS has said that even visitors have the rights of citizens when it > >> come > >> >> >>to legal processes. After all, you expect their homeland laws to > apply > >> in > >> >> >>the US would you? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> >Correct. But they also realize that the rights apply only when those > >> >> >people are physically in the USA. Which is why some bad guys are held > >> >> >elsewhere. > >> >> > > >> >> >John > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Well, Bush thought Gitmo qualified as "elsewhere" but the USSC said no. > >> Then > >> >> he held people in Europe, which is raising a stink there. It might keep > >> some > >> >> prospective EU members out even. > >> > > >> >Actually, no it didn't. It said only that Congress had some say in > >> >the matter. > >> > > >> No, Bush claimed the detainees could not sue in US courts and the case > should > >> be dismissed. The USSC said they could, and heard the case. Not talking > >> about the way of trying them; talking about the right to sue. > > > >No, it said that the Bush plan hadn't been authorized by congress, > >but that they were free to do so. > > > >--- > > Keith > > No, Bush claimed the court didn't even have the right to hear the case > because they were held outside the US, at Gitmo. The USSC obviously > disagreed, as they heard the case. > They heard the case but the decision was that his plan couldn't go forward without congressional approval. Pay attention. BTW, the SCotUS is not superior to any other branch, or at least is not supposed to be. They've been told before "with what army are you going to enforce your decision". -- Keith
From: T Wake on 4 Oct 2006 15:30 "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message news:eg66i2tu83m9he0stj9l8l0kdpulpc7s6d(a)4ax.com... > 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. I > have no desire to go back. At the moment, while I think it would be nice and I wish I could say I had been, I have no desire to go there either :-) > 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. Just like France....
From: T Wake on 4 Oct 2006 15:31
<jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:efvu2h$8ss_003(a)s811.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <k1CUg.49$45.181(a)news.uchicago.edu>, > mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>In article <efta6e$8ss_003(a)s888.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>In article <efr837$sb7$3(a)blue.rahul.net>, >>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>>In article <c7WdncygLPPv3r3YRVnytQ(a)pipex.net>, >>>>T Wake <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>[...] >>>>>The western world bandies the term "war" around much too easily. (War >>>>>on >>>>>Terror, War on Drugs, War on Obesity etc.) >>>> >>>>It is time for a war on the improper use of the term "war on". >>> >>>Yes. I always thought that these sound bytes were crying >>>wolf. When was the first one? Johnson's War on Poverty? >>> >>Well, there was this and "the War on Cancer". Not sure which came >>first. > > I don't remember that one. Another item I've forgotten :-(. > Aha. We need a war on forgetfulness then..... |