Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: JoeBloe on 26 Nov 2006 10:29 On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 12:09:11 -0000, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >news:l08gm2he8d16ve3dlfkuoiblcbngogeeb7(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 17:57:14 +0000 (UTC), kensmith(a)green.rahul.net >> (Ken Smith) Gave us: >> >>>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. >> >> The word is AWE, you dipshit. > >Nice spelling lame. Thanks. He deserved it. I do not, however, need your approval, nor does your retarded critique need to be positive. > You really are a pointless individual. I know you are. BTW, you spelled the words "I" and "am" incorrectly in that sentence. > >> You should have picked an example that you at least know the >> spelling of. > >Not only do you miss the point of _both_ posts you respond to, but your well >of hatred means you cant do anything but insult and argue. That's not all I can do, you dumbfuck. That may be all I am doing when a twit like you looks. > >Sad really. Yes, you are. > Were (are) you bullied at school? > Did you ever achieve a mental age that was greater than 15?
From: Phineas T Puddleduck on 26 Nov 2006 10:30 In article <l8KdnTQ0jcaqL_TYnZ2dnUVZ8tCdnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > > > > Oh, my. My, my, my, my. YOu really should figure out whom > > you are talking about before you pull outrageous boners like > > this one. > > Nonsense. > > You allude to having a background making _you_ a computer guru, but your > posts suggest that if this was ever true it is truly in the past now. > > In the same vein, _you_ should figure out who you are talking to before you > make outrageous claims like you often do. I thought this was truly classic. Countdown to "it was the flu" excuse in 5....4... -- Just \int_0^\infty du it! -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: krw on 26 Nov 2006 10:33 In article <Rs9ah.15783$9v5.6767(a)newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>, lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... > > "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message > news:MPG.1fd25cd82201f847989c99(a)news.individual.net... > > In article <pMO9h.6329$yf7.4173(a)newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>, > > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... > >> > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message > >> news:HZidnczurMtWkvrYnZ2dnUVZ8tmdnZ2d(a)pipex.net... > >> > > >> > 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? > >> > >> > >> Well, two outta three ain't bad. > >> > > Of course an unthinking sock puppet would say that. > > ...which is what a person would say if they had no *logical* argument to > disprove what I say, You three couldn't kissy-face each other more if you were in the same bed playing show-n-tell. > and need instead to try to dismiss me with insults. You really are a piece of work. > You're as lame (although not quite as hypocritical) as unsettled. From you, "lame" is a compliment. The rest you're not one to judge. -- Keith
From: T Wake on 26 Nov 2006 10:33 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ekc910$8qk_004(a)s963.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <45699770.B6957F47(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >>> >rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >>> >> krw wrote: >>> >> > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >>> >> > > krw wrote: >>> >> > > > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >>> >> > > > > krw wrote: >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > > you'd likely be all for nationalizing the oil companies >>> >> > > > > > too. >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > What would be the point of that ? >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > It makes as much sense as nationalizing health care; none. Why >>> >> > > > don't you nationalize food production while you're at it? >>> >> > > >>> >> > > Who said anything about nationalisation ? >>> >> > >>> >> > What exactly do you think *NATIONALIZED* Health Care is? >>> >> > >>> >> > Dumb donkey! >>> >> >>> >> The NHS *does not* nationalise all health care. >>> >> >>> >> Private practice continues and GPs run their own practices >>> >> essentially > as >>> >> they like. They simply receive a salary from the NHS. >>> > >>> >If they receive a salary from the NHS, their practices *have* been >>> >nationalized. They're no longer in control of their business. >>> >Sheesh! >>> > >>> There is something more important here. He cannot conceive >>> of a medical distriubtion system that isn't completely >>> controlled by the national government. >> >>You're utterly wrong. >> >>The government doesn't control the 'medical distribution system' as you >>call > it. >>There is private practice too as I keep telling you. > > But only your upper, upper class are allowed to use those > services. Blimey, when you get some nonsense in your head it sticks doesnt it? Good job you filter my posts because this really is nonsense. You should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking of writing it. What on Earth makes you think this is true? > How long do you think it will take some socialist > to use that as a class warfare tool? So the US health care is a class warfare tool? Given that _you_ are the one who bangs on about getting rid of the middle class, I'd be more worried about you. > YOu've already decimated > your wealthy class by bankrupting them through death taxes. Idiocy.
From: JoeBloe on 26 Nov 2006 10:34
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 12:14:25 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: > > >JoeBloe wrote: > >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) Gave us: >> >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. >> >> The word is AWE, you dipshit. >> >> You should have picked an example that you at least know the >> spelling of. > >Never heard of a typo have you ? > > >Graham > Well, then he'll come back and declare such. Ever heard of a rebuttal? |