Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Ken Smith on 24 Nov 2006 14:12 In article <mUb9h.24805$yl4.22099(a)newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: [....] >> Depends on the effectiveness of the infrastructure. > >Name one that is. Bolder Dam AKA Hoover Dam. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: T Wake on 24 Nov 2006 14:23 "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message news:ek7bpq$hv4$3(a)blue.rahul.net... > In article <HZidnczurMtWkvrYnZ2dnUVZ8tmdnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, > T Wake <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > [....] >>Bit like saying that because the Irish Republicans spent thirty years >>bombing the UK, any political party with "Republican" in its name supports >>terrorism, violence and non-political methods of forcing people to obey >>it. >> >>Well, is that the case? > > A fairly good argument could be made if you assume: > > "shock and aw" == terrorism > war == violence > war == "nonpolitical methods" > > You should have picked a better example. I don't know, I still like my example :-)
From: T Wake on 24 Nov 2006 14:24 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:456733A5.7DBC7498(a)hotmail.com... > > > T Wake wrote: > >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >> > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> I'm told >> >>> >> that a successful socialist economy is in Sweden. I have to study >> >>> >> that. >> >>> > >> >>> >It's called social democracy. >> >>> >> >>> I know. The fact that the word democracy has to be included gives >> >>> me a slight warning. >> >> >> >>And your fear of democracy doesn't surprise me. >> > >> > <ahem> The word democracy is included in a political party's name >> > for the same reason the word "science" is put into Computer Science >> > degree's name. >> >> This is your real bias. Social democracy is not a political party in this >> context (yes some countries have a "Social Democratic Party" but that was >> never an issue here). >> >> You bias is ensuring you are incapable of making a reasoned judgement >> about >> policies or foreign governments. >> >> Bit like saying that because the Irish Republicans spent thirty years >> bombing the UK, any political party with "Republican" in its name >> supports >> terrorism, violence and non-political methods of forcing people to obey >> it. >> >> Well, is that the case? > > It seems to work for the US Republicans ! :-)
From: krw on 24 Nov 2006 14:25 In article <ek79lm$r6e$2(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu says... > In article <3fcbb$45647f3d$4fe77c5$17560(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > >Lloyd Parker wrote: > > > >> In article <ek1equ$8ss_003(a)s853.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > > > >>>>Water after a natural disaster. Monopolies. There are many examples > where > >>>>unbridled capitalism is just plain wrong. > > > >>>Have you considered that people should plan ahead? > > > >> Have you considered compassion? Caring (about more than money, that is)? > > > >Where necessary and it isn't part of a permanent scheme, sure. > > > >> AT&T once had a monopoly on phone service. Tell me how someone could damn > >> "plan ahead"! > > > >AT&T's former monopoly was licensed and regulated. They > >eventally voluntarily gave it up in order to be permitted > >to invest their profits in something unrelated to > >their primary business. > > > > Just in case you haven't been paying attention, it was a gov't lawsuit that > broke them up. > > >And just in case you haven't been paying attention, the > >phoenix is arising out of its ashes. > > > > Yep, under the Bush administration, which lets business do whatever it wants. Oh, is that why the Enron, Tyco, and Adelphia executives are going to prison. Do grow up! -- Keith
From: T Wake on 24 Nov 2006 14:29
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4567396C.7C52AD37(a)hotmail.com... > > > T Wake wrote: > >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message >> > "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >> >> >> >> Being a Usenet PlonkTARD is likely worse. Announcing your filter >> >> file edits plants you squarely at the bottom of the barrel. >> > >> > Oh, you mean like Unsettled does? >> >> And lots of the others here (/BAH, Terrell etc). > > It's intruiging how us 'socialists' don't have this yearning to cut > ourselves > off from opinions we may not agree with. Sadly true. > On the subject of which, during a chat with a very intelligent mate of > mine > yesterday he reckoned I should cut my hair and join the Conservative Party > ! He > reckoned I'd go far. How times have changed :-) The Labour party is privatising things all over the place, beating down the unions and increasing spending on defence (including the one time arch enemy of labour - the Nuclear Deterrent!), while the Tories are going about saying how much they value civil liberties, want to fight climate change etc. Really strange turn of events! :-D |