Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 7 Dec 2006 07:37 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:el91gj$8ss_001(a)s856.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <4576FB2F.437F0D91(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>T Wake wrote: >> >>> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>> > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> None of this preservation matters if extreme Islam >>> >>> becomes the predominate governing and economic law. >>> >> >>> >>And how exactly is that ever going to happen ? >>> > >>> > Listen to you enemy. They aren't lying to you. >>> >>> Interesting take on things. You fail to say how this is ever going to > happen >>> other than to point to the myriad of threats made by an extremist >>> minority. >>> The extremists have no way of forcing people to convert to Islam, nor >>> can >>> they institute Islamic law on unwilling countries. We can do that to >>> ourselves if people become so frightened of the alternatives (or the >>> alternatives become worse). >>> >>> More importantly you ascribe an automatic truth to enemy propaganda. Is >>> there a reason for this? The enemy are saying things to cause fear, >>> uncertainty and doubt. You, oddly, accept everything they say and assume >>> they are capable of doing amazing things against a democracy. >>> >>> You really do have a low opinion of the democratic process and what it >>> is >>> capable of. >> >>Never mind the democratic process. >> >>If any Muslims over here try it on, they'll discover what a swift kick to >>the >>nuts does ! > > With the methods available today, you will never see your > killer. If they kill Eeyore they have failed. Killing people doesn't convert them, it just kills them. The fear you monger is more likely to cause a conversion.
From: jmfbahciv on 7 Dec 2006 07:33 In article <4576EB91.7516663D(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: >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >Ever hear of the "peace dividend"? We weren't fighting the cold war >> >> >> >anymore. >> >> >> >> >> >> And you swallowed the sound byte hook, line, and sinker. >> >> > >> >> >That's sound bite btw. I'm amused how it's been corrupted so quickly. >> >> >> >> It is "byte" if all you do is rely on Google for your facts. >> > >> >So you do have web access ? That's not what Google tells me ! >> > >> >http://www.google.com/search?rls=en&q=sound+bite >> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soundbite >> > >> > >> >> >> The cold war didn't just stop. >> >> > >> >> >Well actually, yes it did. Aside from N Korea I suppose. >> >> >> >> Afghanistan and the Taliban was caused by cold war skirmishes. >> > >> >It was certainly caused by Cold War stupidity ! >> >> Oh, I see. ARe you saying that the Cold War should not >> have been waged? Are you saying that Europe should have >> abandoned NATO and allowed Berlin to fall? And that they >> should have welcomed Stalin's troops with flowers? > >The only flowers I recall was when the East Germans knocked down the Berlin >Wall. The only bit of Berlin to fall wrt the Cold War. I have a piece of it here >actually. > >The stupidity wrt Afghanistan was backing the Taliban ( oops they called >themselves Mujahadeen 'freedom fighters back then - not Taliban terrorists ). > > >> >> And everybody >> >> seems to forget about southeast Asia, India and China. >> > >> >What Cold War there ? India ??? !!! >> >> India was classified as third world country. > >And what does that have to do with the Cold War ? Are you joking? Let's back up. What is the characteristic the makes a country to be classified as third world? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 7 Dec 2006 07:38 In article <MPG.1fe0b1cde390f9b6989db8(a)news.individual.net>, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >In article <el6i2m$8qk_001(a)s867.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >> In article <9857e$45761fc1$4fe7071$17377(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >> >Lloyd Parker wrote: >> <snip> >> >> >>>>You can be cash poor after buying a house though >> >>>>and finding all the things that urgently need doing to make it >> >>>>habitable. >> > >> >>>sure. But you aren't poor and all your "rent" is going into >> >>>your real estate pocket. I didn't buy a house until I was >> >>>told my rent was going up. So I went out and bought a house >> >>>where the monthly payments were less than my current rent. >> > >> >> I betr you saved up for a down payment though. >> > >> >It doesn't sound like she did. > >The down payment on my first house was in three digits. The total >closing costs, including tax escrow, was less than $5k. >> >> I simply don't remember. All I remembeer is that were >> a lot of checks moving back and forth over that table. :-) >> >> > It doesn't sound as though >> >buying a house was in her plans. >> >> It wasn't. I only bought it because the rent was cheaper. >> I was more interested in getting my work done. > >We did the same calculation. The apartment we were living in was >going condo. The red-herring price for our unit was $65K, plus >$250/mo. commons fees. We bought our house for $60K. Even at a >14.5% interest rate we broke even on the rent (with normal >increases) within a year. I bought just before the intersest rates went insane. > A couple of years later we refinanced >down to 10% then to 8%, saving a *lot* of money. I also made sure that I had a loan that could be paid off early without penalty. >> >> > I can say for a fact I didn't. >> >I got into my first house ($50K) with $1K of my own. Let's >> >just say that the seller and the realtor were both very >> >motivated. >> >> I was very used to moving every semester from being in college. >> I had no "settling down" genes like the rest of my family. >> I still don't have curtains up on the windows :-). I've >> just recently started "decorating" the inside of the house. > >It must be exciting in your neighborhood. ;-) They can't see the inside. I'm painting everything shiny white so I can see again. I'm almost to the point where I can put up JMF's blowup picture of the KI with a VT05 running SYSDPY in my junk room. But first, I have to wait until the dead body stops stinking. > >I'm "redecorating" the entire house too, in preparation to split. I don't know how you can manage that. I suspect whoever gets my house will just raze it and build something that isn't holey. Fieldstone foundations suck. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 7 Dec 2006 07:42 In article <4576E01A.DC9181AE(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >vjp2.at(a)at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote: >> > >> >> Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former U.S. national security adviser.. on >> >> "Political Capital with Al Hunt," to air on Bloomberg Television.. Asked >> >> whether the U.S. should have to accept the reality of the Iranians >> >> obtaining >> >> nuclear weapons, he said, "I'm not entirely convinced they are really >> >> seeking >> >> them." The Iranian leadership is "seeking a comprehensive nuclear program" >> >> that would put the country in a position to produce nuclear weapons, >> >> Brzezinski said. [jmathewson(a)bloomberg.net November 24, 2006] >> > >> >I suspect that's quite an accurate analysis. >> >> You are swallowing Democrat sound bites again. > >Hardly. > >I came to that conclusion some considerable time ago based on a whole stack of >things. In any case I pay next to no attention to what politicians have to say on >the matter, whichever their persuasion and certainly don't give much credibility >to purely US politics in that respect. But your BBC news reports our politicians' sound bites as news. You are basing your decisions on political slickerhood. > > > >> For some strange >> reason, Carter is rearing his ugly head and trying to swing >> towards ceding to Islam. > >No he isn't ! > >How about a cite here ? Sigh! He's hawking another book. So far, all of his book selling interviews promote the same opinion that extremists will be willing to talk and compromise. > > >> I don't understand this one. The more >> I read about his administration, the more convinced I get that >> I should have been petrified. > >You're easily petrified it seems. > >Having thought quite long about these issues, I've concluded that much US reaction >is based on fear of the unknown or unfamiliar actually and the typical US reaction >is to try to stamp it out as a result. So there is no place for mess prevention? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 7 Dec 2006 07:48
In article <el6q75$tev$1(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <cfe5c$4575a308$4fe71d5$13749(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: <snip> >>I give you "feminine instinct" to ponder. > >No thanks. That and Quantum Physics at the same time may make my head >explode. Oh! That would explain why the theory of everythings posted here never explain men. <snip> >Your "sane" assumes that the data going into the logic are the facts as >you believe them to be. If you believed that banging on a drum made it >rain and that you needed rain to make your corn grow, you would logically >bang on a drum. To someone without that idea, a man walking around >outside banging a drum, may look insane. The banging of the drum gives people something to do while waiting for the rain. <snip> /BAH |