Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 8 Dec 2006 17:14 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:4579D4EA.8E082CC5(a)hotmail.com... > > > T Wake wrote: > >> "Jonathan Kirwan" <jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote in message >> > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >> >>> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >> >>> >> >>>>Oh yes, we've got to deter a first-strike by India. >> >>> >> >>> It appears you haven't been keeping on who has nuclear weapons >> >>> and who is working on getting them in that area. >> >> >> >>Hahaha. India and Pakistan have them. Pakistan, an "ally in the war on >> >>terror" is an Islamic nation with a reasonable chance of dissidents who >> >>will provide equipment or knowledge to anti-western organisations. >> >>What has India got to do with it? >> > >> > Not just a reasonable _chance_. Pakistan _has_ already done so -- >> > it's a fact, not a prospectus. >> >> It is a fact it has happened, which is why there is a reasonable chance >> it >> will happen again - yet Pakistan remains a Valued Ally in the War on >> Terror. > > You mean 'Valued Ally' (tm) surely ? Yes :-)
From: hill on 9 Dec 2006 08:00 hill(a)rowland.org wrote: > Winfield Hill wrote: >> Winfield Hill wrote: >>> Michael A. Terrell wrote: >>>> Winfield Hill wrote: >>>>> Winfield Hill wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> 4200 postings and still going strong. Amazing. >>>>> >>>>> Wow, now 7200 posts and still going strong. And most >>>>> of the posts were under the original subject title. This >>>>> must be some kind of a record. Certainly it's a stress >>>>> test for the Google Groups web-page display code, etc. >>>> >>>> Never have so many, said so much, about so little! ;-) >>>> >>>> I heard of one long flame war that passed 10K posts, >>>> but I never found out which newsgroup. >>> >>> We passed 9000 on the 14th, and are now within 100 posts >>> of 10,000. Keep up the good work guys, you can do it! >> >> Good job guys and gals, over 10,000 posts, and still >> going strong. And still on topic more or less. I've only >> read a smattering of the posts here and there, and there's >> a minimum of flaming SFAICS. Nice to see. > > Still going strong, over 11,300 posts, no sign of slowing. Impressive, zoomed right past 12,000 without slowing, now at 12130 posts and climbing towards 13000, going strong.
From: jmfbahciv on 9 Dec 2006 07:59 In article <uIidnf5bE6H7N-TYnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:elblsn$8ss_006(a)s848.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <el9aj0$qc5$11(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, >> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>>In article <el91mu$8ss_002(a)s856.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >>>>Are you joking? Let's back up. What is the characteristic >>>>the makes a country to be classified as third world? >>>> >>>>/BAH >>> >>>Originally, that it wasn't aligned with the US or USSR. >> >> OK. At least we have a similar definition. >> >>> Then it became more >>>of a descriptor of the level of development, industrialization, etc. >> >> When did that happen? The decade will be close enough. > > >1970's. I've been reading histories of the UN that include that decade. They hadn't redefined the term in those books. Was there a resolution that stated the redefinition? /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 9 Dec 2006 08:03 In article <MPG.1fe3529183897338989dc2(a)news.individual.net>, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >In article <elbml8$8qk_001(a)s848.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... >> In article <MPG.1fe1fd93a34fa40e989dba(a)news.individual.net>, >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: <snip> >> >> >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. >> > >> >I tore the carpet up from the second bedroom yesterday. Today is >> >the upstairs hallway and stairs. Then I have some repairs to do to >> >the railings. Then stain, polyurethane, and paint the walls. The >> >master bedroom carpet gets torn out next week and then new >> >carpeting in the upstairs. Two weeks later the entire downstairs >> >gets recarpeted (gotta tear all that out and repaint inbetween). >> >> Why are you carpeting? I never understood that because I assume >> that the first thing the new female does is redecorate. > >Yes, and it's the last thing a male does. ;-) <GRIN> > I mentioned before >that we're bailing out of NE (taxes). The carpet is 20YO (original >contractor's special) and in pretty poor condition, even though we >don't wear shoes in the house. Instead of offering a "carpet >allowance" in the price, I decided to just do it. It makes >painting much easier too. That's true. I'll bet your painting rate is higher than mine. I manage to do about 4sq.ft. at a time. Then rest for three days. What do you do with the old carpet? My mother's been cutting up some old stuff and using them as throw rugs. <snip> /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 9 Dec 2006 08:06
In article <45797651.EACB8B17(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: >> >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> But your BBC news reports our politicians' sound bites as news. >> >> >> You are basing your decisions on political slickerhood. >> >> > >> >> >Who said I was relying exclusively on the BBC ? >> >> >> >> Because I've traced it. >> > >> >Traced what ? I read multiple sources of info indeed including the BBC but >> >also >> >American and Arab sources for example, even Russian sometimes ! I was just >> >reading the Times of India in fact. You can soon weed out national bias that >> >way. >> >> I used to use that approach. But it's not as reliable anymore >> because news items usually have a one-person source and every >> news outlet picks it up. Your approach only works if competing >> news agencies send people they employ. Nowadays, the only >> spots that get covered by competing media are >> the frenzy of the week. > >If you used the web I'd recommend Al Jazeera for an interesting alternative >source. Here's the link anyway. > >http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/55ABE840-AC30-41D2-BDC9-06BBE2A36665.h tm I read that to find out the latest propoganda. I find very little news that hasn't been soaped, rinsed, repeat. Usually I use it to see how news items are slanted, using the premise that I might be able to get an idea of their mindset and how it's stuck. /BAH /BAH |