Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: JoeBloe on 9 Dec 2006 21:52 On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 23:33:32 -0000, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >Like you'd know. When you sober up you still think it is 1876. > You're an idiot. That is throughout the entire post. I merely chose this segment as a gem of your utter stupidity.
From: JoeBloe on 9 Dec 2006 21:55 On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 23:36:19 -0000, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >> You are a hypocrite as well I see. > >I have been called worse. You are really bad at insults. You only have seven >or eight words to choose from. You affirming being a hypocrite destroys any modicum of honor or character you may have had a chance at having had an inkling of in your pathetic body at any time in your pathetic life.
From: krw on 9 Dec 2006 22:06 In article <krgmn25gp0m70udph2ke65sbtb3oh04rio(a)4ax.com>, joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org says... > On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 17:25:02 +0000 (UTC), kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken > Smith) Gave us: > > >In article <1165669215.800813.245470(a)f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > > <hill(a)rowland.org> wrote: > >[....] > >> Impressive, zoomed right past 12,000 without slowing, now > >> at 12130 posts and climbing towards 13000, going strong. > > > >I think we'll hit 100,000 if the world doesn't end before then. > > > > > > > >-- > Figure on between 125 and 200 posts a day. > Oh hell, that's just T Wake's contribution. It seems has has even less work to do then the dumb donkey. -- Keith
From: Eeyore on 10 Dec 2006 00:50 John Fields wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >T Wake wrote: > > > >> "Borek" <m.borkowski(a)delete.chembuddy.these.com.parts> wrote > >> > >> > On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 14:15:25 +0100, <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> >>>>> The way the Democrats tested reactions > >> >>>>> of the US was to go to Europe and give a speech that contained > >> >>>>> the ideas they wanted a reaction test. BBC would report on > >> >>>>> the speech. The American news media would report on what > >> >>>>> the BBC reported minus the fact that it came from some guy's > >> >>>>> speech. The politician would then watch to see how the > >> >>>>> voters of the US received it. What you saw a the Democrat > >> >>>>> platform had been vetted through Europe this way. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Well, considering Europeans are healthier, are happier, live longer, > >> >>>> are > >> >>>> more educated and more literate, etc., maybe we could take some > >> >>>> lessons. > >> >>> > >> >>> We do? Good, I am not moving anywehere. > >> >> > >> >> <grin> You detected the attitude, too. > >> > > >> > Nope. I was deadly serious ;) > >> > >> I may be wrong, but I think she thought you lived in the US ;-) > > > >That was my suspicion too. > > > >I suppose BAH couln't imagine one might be happy living in Europe ? > > --- > Paying about 40% of what you make as tribute to your government? About 37% actually and it's only a few percent more than the US average, in return for which we get our healthcare system. Sounds like a good deal to me actually. > Value added taxes which take away even more of your discretionary > income? Already included in the above > Taxes on motor fuels which keep you close to home? Already included in the above. > Yeah, it sounds like a lot of fun to me... > --- > > >Time will tell I guess. > > --- > It already has. You've slipped from being the mightiest nation on > Earth to whatever it is you are now, and why? Because your > government still isn't republican. What ???? > What is it about you all that you can't embrace taking > responsibility for your own actions instead of blaming your errors > on Mum. Or Dad? You're so far off the mark ( by about 180 degrees ) that it begs belief how you get these ideas. > You have no hard constitution to speak of and, presumably, none in > the offing so, ISTM, that what you want to do is play fast and loose > with what you've got in place now and dodge the fallout. > > Am I wrong? Yes. Graham
From: Eeyore on 10 Dec 2006 00:53
T Wake wrote: > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >>> 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. > >> > >>It appears that you have some odd ideas about who'd even > >> think about engaging in > >>a first strike on the USA. > > > > Wake up. To start a mess does not require a first strike on the > > US. An atomic war between India and Pakistan would create > > enough EMF to wipe out all the electronic paper pushing that > > has been contracted out to India. > > Blimey. When the aliens land we need to make sure we have quark-guns because > they are the only thing which can get through their force fields. We need to > work at preventing this mess know. > > I can imagine it so it must be real. You do know that the USMC has a 'space division' ??? Graham |