Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 4 Dec 2006 09:48 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: > > > >Now given that I know this about you, why should I take your word on > >Hillary's actions? > > You might try to find the Business Week article. You might observe > her history where, given a choice of a simple legal action vs. > a complicated illegal action, she picks the latter. You might > review how she tried to skirt around Congress when she was given > the power to run the US' medical business. > > You really should do all that; she's now doing the preliminary > running for 2008 Presidency. The Liberals in this state want > her for President so that Bill can take over again. That might be no bad thing although after GWB, almost 'anyone' would be an improvement. Graham
From: T Wake on 4 Dec 2006 11:45 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ekuoqj$8qk_002(a)s896.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <45724638.B51686A3(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>Ken Smith wrote: >> >>> The so called "war on terror" has cost the US a great deal without >>> really >>> yelding anything much as a result. >> >>You're kidding. >> >>It's yielded greater instability in the word and more hatred of the USA ( >>entirely justified this time ). >> >>What sheer brilliance. > > You both have been blind. As if you would have _any_ frame of reference to come to this conclusion.
From: T Wake on 4 Dec 2006 11:46 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:el10a3$8ss_002(a)s787.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <45731BA4.76584814(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >Ken Smith wrote: >>> > >>> >> The so called "war on terror" has cost the US a great deal without > really >>> >> yelding anything much as a result. >>> > >>> >You're kidding. >>> > >>> >It's yielded greater instability in the word and more hatred of the USA >>> >( >>> >entirely justified this time ). >>> > >>> >What sheer brilliance. >>> >>> You both have been blind. >> >>Come on then. Don't be shy. What's your opinion on the matter ? > > The sound bite "war on xxxx" was misused so often that, when > the real thing is happening, nobody pays attention. The fable > about the boy crying wolf has become reality. How is this different to what Ken Smith and Eeyore said?
From: T Wake on 4 Dec 2006 12:01 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ekrsqs$8ss_003(a)s1015.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <ekplk1$qqg$1(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, > lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>In article <ekpd88$8ss_020(a)s920.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>In article <ekpc5r$gh6$2(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, >>> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>>In article <ekpa2n$8ss_005(a)s920.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>In article <ekmuf7$sk6$1(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, >>>>> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>>>>In article <95d74$456dc13c$4fe7752$20089(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>>>>> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>>>>>>Lloyd Parker wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In article <485af$456c7009$4fe7665$9791(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>>>>>>> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>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. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But you get ahead without regard to wealth. Your ability to pay >>doesn't >>>>>>>> affect your advancement, as it does with a capitalistic system. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Performance is the only currency deciding advancement, >>>>>>>which isn't socialist at all. >>>>>> >>>>>>Sure it is. While everyone gets what they need to stay alive and > healthy, >>>>>the >>>>>>best advance. >>>>> >>>>>No, they don't. You need to learn what motivates people to do >>>>>estraordinary things. >>>>> >>>>>> However, wealth isn't a consideration in advancement as it is >>>>>>under capitalism. >>>>> >>>>>Wealth is a side effect of capitalism. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>><snip> >>>>> >>>>>/BAH >>>> >>>>Are you seriously suggesting someone born to a poverty family has the >>>>same >>>>chance of becoming successful as someone born to a rich family in a >>>>capitalistic society? >>> >>>Yes. I will even go further and state that the poor kid has more >>>motivation than the rich kid. Thus, the poor kid will succeed >>>more often than the rich kid. >>> >>>A lot of people are reasonably wealthy from working on a production >>>line and not spending all of their money on junk. That can only >>>happen in a capitalistic-based society. Not only do these people >>>become wealthy, they breed kids so become wealthier. Only >>>people who are hungry go out and shoot dinner. >>> >>>/BAH >> >>You've obviously led a very sheltered -- I'd even say cloistered -- life >>if >>you think that comes close to being reality. > > You think it is not reality because your environment is based on > socialism. When everybody gets everything equally, nobody is > allowed to be wealthy. Thus, all are poor, equally poor, but > poor. Where is Emory University? (Hint: its website seems to imply Atlanta, Georgia) So, as Lloyd is living in the US, if not an American himself, how do you think his society is based on socialism? In which European society do you think no one is allowed to be wealthy? In the hallowed words of Viz Comics, you are completely hatstand.
From: T Wake on 4 Dec 2006 12:02
<jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:ekupnf$8qk_007(a)s896.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <4572DAA8.52765B20(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> > >>> >> When everybody gets everything equally, nobody is >>> >> allowed to be wealthy. Thus, all are poor, equally poor, but >>> >> poor. >>> > >>> >Even communist Russia wasn't run like that ! >>> >>> Of course it was. Only the viscious of the managers got the >>> power. >> >>We were talking about wealth, albeit rather limited wealth in that era. > > And look how their agriculture suffered. How people get food is a clue > to their economy, social structure, trade and power. And here we go on another of /BAH's crazy strawmen diversions from the insanity she has previously posted. Does your primary care worker know you are posting to USENET? |