Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 25 Nov 2006 21:34 unsettled wrote: > Phineas T Puddleduck wrote: > > krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > > >>What's the matter? You have to stoop to snip-forging? You are > >>areal piece of work. I think that's enough of you! > > > > > > Thats pretty rich coming from a poster who has to try hard to be > > noticeable, let alone interesting. It seems the quality of political > > debate in the UK is far more mature as we grew out of calling people > > "leftist" or "rightist" as insults quite a while ago. > > Yes indeed, and grew cruder in the process. The USA has taken crudity to an entirely new level. Graham
From: Eeyore on 25 Nov 2006 21:36 "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > Don Bowey wrote: > > > > Oregon has it's own medical plan. > > And a fine job they do, letting their mental patients run free to > make threatening phone calls to people. One has lost multiple ISP > accounts for threatening people online, been bared from the local > Wal-Mart, and arrested for trying to run over someone, as well. Under the NHS he would be 'sectioned'. Graham
From: Eeyore on 25 Nov 2006 21:39 unsettled wrote: > Ken Smith wrote: > > > > Communism needn't have a large number of layers. It is as you say where > > the means of production is owned by the state. I don't think they can > > maintain that mindset without also assuming that the state will do a good > > job of running things. > > Old habits die hard. Look at the guy who just died of poisoning > in England. That's nought to do with communism. Graham
From: Eeyore on 25 Nov 2006 21:40 unsettled wrote: > T Wake wrote: > > "Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message > >>"T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> > >>>>Her idea of running the economy using 'corner shop' economics was a > >>>>total disaster. > >>> > >>>Don't let /BAH hear you say that.... She is convinced Thatcher was the > >>>great > >>>saviour of UK economics. /BAH wouldn't for one second think that > >>>Thatcher's meddling caused all manner of long term problems. > >> > >>And not just political. I view the chav phenomenon that troubles area > >>near here as a social repercussion to the late thatcherite agenda. > > > > I certainly agree on that. "Chavs" have a tendency to crop up most in the > > areas most affected by Thacherite policies. > > Good grief! Good grief *WHAT* ? Look up 'social exclusion' will you ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 25 Nov 2006 21:46
Don Klipstein wrote: > >Ken Smith wrote: > > > >Old habits die hard. Look at the guy who just died of poisoning > >in England. > > > >> [..communism on small scale vs large..] > > > >>>So the experiment is done, and so far as those > >>>of us who undertand it, the impossibility of having an > >>>effective large scale communism is proved impossible. > > > >> I almost think we need to call large scale and small scale communism > >> different things. When the ruled and the ruler are no longer in direct > >> touch with each other, a whole new dynamic sets in. > > > >Possibly it is that a gang mentality sets in, I don't > >know. Perhaps that's why out multiple tiers in the US > >work reasonably well. > > Maybe there is a gang mentality in recently-Communist Russia, and > similar gang mentality in political parties that have enjoyed many years > of rule! They don't mean Italians when the 'Russian Mafia' is mentioned. Graham |