Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: John Fields on 28 Nov 2006 11:41 On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 21:22:32 -0000, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >John Fields is trying to be a holier than >thou anti-troll grammar Nazi, --- Nope, just trolling a troll. Seems to be working what with your latest comments about kill filing me. -- JF
From: John Fields on 28 Nov 2006 12:15 On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 08:02:57 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >John Fields wrote: >> >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >Sadly given the sci.* nature of all the groups (un)fortunate enough to be >> >> >graced with this long running thread, there is very little understanding of >> >> >science displayed. >> >> >> >> --- >> >> And why should there be? >> >> >> >> The thread has nothing to with science regardless of whether >> >> "science" is in the subject line or not, and its content is >> >> off-topic in all the groups it's been posted to, being used mostly >> >> to annoy by trolls like you and Graham. >> > >> >Us ??? Trolls ??? >> >> --- >> Was there ever any doubt? >> --- >> >> >You seem to be taking a keen interest in it too btw. >> >> --- >> Of course. The politics of control through intimidation by >> confusion is very interesting and I like to watch the practitioners >> as they muddy the water and play with smoke and mirrors. > >Good Lord ! > >The ones muddying the waters here have been the right-wing Americans. They keep >denying reality. --- As if _you_ knew what reality was, LOL! -- JF
From: John Fields on 28 Nov 2006 12:17 On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 08:04:10 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > >> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:00:33 -0500, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >> >> >In article <7k8km21br4kravjd07m0jl9rpkcmthtecc(a)4ax.com>, >> >jfields(a)austininstruments.com says... >> >> On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 20:28:19 +0000, Eeyore >> >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >John Fields wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> When they talk about capitalism, it isn't our definition and >> >> >> >> we get in fights. What seems even odder, Europeans call >> >> >> >> the thingie we call socialism, capitalism. I haven't explored >> >> >> >> this further. So add a grain of salt. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >There is no such confusion other than in your interpretation of the meanings of >> >> >> >the word. There is no socialist party in the USA btw. >> >> >> >> >> >> --- >> >> >> What's this, then? >> >> >> >> >> >> http://sp-usa.org/ >> >> > >> >> >Do they have any elected representatives ? >> > >> >Bernie Sanders (new US Senator) ran as a Socialist for mayor of >> >Burlington. He since switched to "Progressive" and then to >> >"Independant" running for the House. Socialist, he is. >> > >> >> --- >> >> That's a different question. Do you concede that there is a US >> >> Socialist Party? >> > >> >The same way he admits ICmax on power pins (portable goal posts). >> >> --- >> Nice. >> >> One more nail in his coffin... :-) >> >> -- >> JF > >idiot --- And yet another. Interesting, nailed from the _inside_. -- JF
From: unsettled on 28 Nov 2006 12:21 Lloyd Parker wrote: > In article <ekhdog$8qk_001(a)s1016.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>But again, what you get doesn't depend on your ability to pay. >>Huh? > In a pure socialistic system, you'd receive what you need without regards to > ability to pay, right? That's how the military works. In the military physical performance is required and routinely tested. Inability to perform results in separation. They have to have the ability to "pay" in terms of services provided.
From: unsettled on 28 Nov 2006 12:22
Lloyd Parker wrote: > In article <862ca$456b8a32$49ecfcf$4294(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > >>Lloyd Parker wrote: >> >>>In article <52483$456b1860$49ecfde$979(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Lloyd Parker wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>In article <MPG.1fd28e4b92c5a97989cc1(a)news.individual.net>, >>>>> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>In article <asydncaDLYw_J_XYRVnygg(a)pipex.net>, >>>>>>usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com says... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck(a)googlemail.com> wrote in > > message > >>>>>>>news:phineaspuddleduck-416009.21422525112006(a)free.teranews.com... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In article <Ls-dnZRLjKdkKvXYnZ2dnUVZ8smdnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>>>>>>>"T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I certainly agree on that. "Chavs" have a tendency to crop up most in >>>>> >>>>>the >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>areas most affected by Thacherite policies. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It seems to be a rebellion to the way things were done. You have the >>>>>>>>worst of both systems. The right wing view that everything now >>>>>>>>disallowed is permissible, and the left wing view that the state should >>>>>>>>mollycoddle you. Add that to a fanatical hatred of anything not "local" >>>>>>>>and "familar" and you have a chav. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I'm left of centre myself. I can see the need for the state to keep >>>>>>>>checks and balances, but human nature sometimes really makes me cry! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Prior to getting embroiled in this thread, I thought I was fairly right > > of > >>>>>>>centre. I now see the error in my ways and I am firmly left of centre > > now. > >>>>>I >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>suspect half the apparently right wing extremists posting on this thread >>>>>>>live very different lives away from USENET. >>>>>> >>>>>>No, you're a left-wing extremist, right there with the dumb donkey. >>>>>>This isn't surprising since you're both socialist Europeons. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>To you, anyone to the left of Atilla the Hun is a socialist. >>>> >>>>You probably ought to read history about Attila (and note the >>>>spelling, it's not a Brit name.) >>> >>> >>>From wikipedia: >>> >>>"n Hungary and Turkey the names of Attila (sometimes as Atilla in > > Turkish)," > >>>Also see http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/bios/b3atilla_p1dz.htm >> >>From your web page: >> >>"While most people see Atilla [more often spelled "Attila"]..." >> >>The following tidbit comes fom a web page that makes the >>hyperhstory page look like a comic book parody on the later >>history of the Huns: >> >>"Hungarian-speaking population of Hungary from the German, Slavic, and >>Romanian minorities. Sz�kely, ethnic group of Transylvania and of >>present-day Romania, is another good example. The Sz�kely (also known as >>Szeklers or Siculi) came into Transylvania either with or before the >>Magyars. Their organization was of the Turkic type, and they are >>probably of Turkic (possibly Avar) stock. By the 11th cent., however, >>they had adopted Magyar speech. Some scholars disputed the word 'adopt' >>since they believe that Sz�kely were of Magyar family, related to one of >>the two sons of Attila the Hun. Sz�kely later formed one of three >>privileged nations of Transylvania (the others were the Magyars and the >>Saxons). " >> >>http://www.republicanchina.org/Hun.html >> >>This page provides a learned study of enough elements to provide >>the reader with sufficient information to make a reasonable >>decision about the languages involved and to arrive at the "correct" >>spelling of Attila's name. >> >>I don't care why you spelled the name as you did. You're in the >>minority. > > > Maybe I just like double-L names! LOL Any Welsh backgorund? |