Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 10 Dec 2006 09:51 In article <457C1212.C502893F(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: >> > >> >> 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. >> > >> >And what's your conclusion. >> > >> >I find Al Jazeera pleasantly unbiased in fact, yet it gives an insight into >> >an Arab perspective of the news. >> >> Anything written is biased. > >There's a significant difference berween the 'natural' bias if you like of >reporting within a context and the deliberate bias created by political dogma. And yet, you can make a statement that Al Jazeera is not biased. It is made by Muslims for the consumption of other Muslims. An aspect of Islam is that the religion is not separated from any aspect of their lifestyle. This has to include their news broadcasts. It cannot report facts without a heavy rinse in the religion dogma. The relgion and politics are the same thing. > > >> That's why science uses the scientific >> method to produce its knowledge. > >So how do find out what's really going on in the world ? Mostly by listening to gossip and thinking about what I've heard. How do you find out? Do you believe everything Al Jazeera broadcasts? What are you going to believe when they start targeting you and yours as the enemy? They broadcast speeches from Al Queda. I wrote once that they didn't lie. Yet you mocked me for thinking that Al Queda was determined to kill me and people like me. Now, which do you believe? /BAH /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 10 Dec 2006 09:58 In article <ubOdnQVEwOQugOHYnZ2dnUVZ8smonZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:elh20o$8qk_001(a)s892.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <rLudnWxVuPVZleHYnZ2dnUVZ8qKvnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:elgsom$8ss_005(a)s892.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <9OKdncnQ5K4OnubYnZ2dnUVZ8qKvnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>"Borek" <m.borkowski(a)delete.chembuddy.these.com.parts> wrote in message >>>>>news:op.tkayhaxz26l578(a)borek... >>>>>> 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, >>>> >>>> You are. >>>> >>>>> but I think she thought you lived in the US ;-) >>>> >>>> Nope. >>>> >>> >>>Ok. I don't get what you meant then. I was giving you the benefit of the >>>doubt and assuming it was supposed to be funny, but now it just doesn't >>>make >>>sense. > >Your previous post still does not make sense and this one does not explain >it. You are talking about something else now. I can't write clearer today. > >> If are able, put yourself in the context of the Poles. They >> died to get rid of their flavor of forced socialism. > >Really? What are you talking about here? > >> All >> people who lived in that area had to know politics and how >> to do politics from the time they started talking as children. > >Blimey, there is nothing like a collection of assumptions, is there. > >> You and I are extreeemely spoiled because we have no memory >> of having to do that. For you, I suspect your parents don't >> a memory of having to do that. > >It is interesting that you say this, after telling me how Europe is >socialist and all of the UK's problems are because we are socialists. When did I say all problems? And you talk about me jumping to extremes. > >In the UK, certainly when I was young, everyone was aware of politics so I >am not sure what you are trying to say here (if anything, you might just be >collecting words together). Your parents were not in danger of disappearing because you said the wrong thing. > >> My folks do have a memory >> but they didn't have to fear their own government as much >> as other countries because we had the Constitution to provide >> the checks and balances. > >When did they have to over throw forced socialism, with the aid of the US >Constitution? Interesting. WWII. > >> If we in the US aren't careful, that will end. > >You are throwing it away because of an imaginary fear. > >> What will be interesting is how Poland's basic rules >> of society evolve over the decades. Other countries >> will also be interesting to watch. > >Well, what will really be interesting is what _you_ learn from things. Since you dismiss everything I've learned, you will have a very dull life. /BAH
From: T Wake on 10 Dec 2006 10:15 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:elh7b8$8qk_003(a)s1128.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <ubOdnQVEwOQugOHYnZ2dnUVZ8smonZ2d(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:elh20o$8qk_001(a)s892.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <rLudnWxVuPVZleHYnZ2dnUVZ8qKvnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>> >>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>news:elgsom$8ss_005(a)s892.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>> In article <9OKdncnQ5K4OnubYnZ2dnUVZ8qKvnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>>>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>"Borek" <m.borkowski(a)delete.chembuddy.these.com.parts> wrote in >>>>>>message >>>>>>news:op.tkayhaxz26l578(a)borek... >>>>>>> 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, >>>>> >>>>> You are. >>>>> >>>>>> but I think she thought you lived in the US ;-) >>>>> >>>>> Nope. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Ok. I don't get what you meant then. I was giving you the benefit of the >>>>doubt and assuming it was supposed to be funny, but now it just doesn't >>>>make >>>>sense. >> >>Your previous post still does not make sense and this one does not explain >>it. You are talking about something else now. > > I can't write clearer today. Ok. >> >>> If are able, put yourself in the context of the Poles. They >>> died to get rid of their flavor of forced socialism. >> >>Really? What are you talking about here? >> >>> All >>> people who lived in that area had to know politics and how >>> to do politics from the time they started talking as children. >> >>Blimey, there is nothing like a collection of assumptions, is there. >> >>> You and I are extreeemely spoiled because we have no memory >>> of having to do that. For you, I suspect your parents don't >>> a memory of having to do that. >> >>It is interesting that you say this, after telling me how Europe is >>socialist and all of the UK's problems are because we are socialists. > > When did I say all problems? And you talk about me jumping to > extremes. Ah, you may be correct here. I am sure there are some problems mentioned in this thread which you dont attribute the UK's rampaging socialist government but I think I missed them. I had thought that the context of this message, and it being posted to USENET, would have explained the domain of applicability for the wording I used. Sorry that was not the case. I will try to be clearer in future. >> >>In the UK, certainly when I was young, everyone was aware of politics so I >>am not sure what you are trying to say here (if anything, you might just >>be >>collecting words together). > > Your parents were not in danger of disappearing because > you said the wrong thing. Neither were yours. >> >>> My folks do have a memory >>> but they didn't have to fear their own government as much >>> as other countries because we had the Constitution to provide >>> the checks and balances. >> >>When did they have to over throw forced socialism, with the aid of the US >>Constitution? Interesting. > > WWII. Wow. I never realised the US was in the thrall of a socialist government. You may not be aware, but WWII included the UK as well - my parents certainly have a memory of that, my father serving and losing two of his brothers in the process. My mother certainly has a memory as my family come from a port, as a result of WWII there is very little architecture pre 1945. Now, given that you were talking about Modern Poland, I am not sure what relevance the experience of the UK or US during WWII is to the Poland as part of the USSR. >> >>> If we in the US aren't careful, that will end. >> >>You are throwing it away because of an imaginary fear. >> >>> What will be interesting is how Poland's basic rules >>> of society evolve over the decades. Other countries >>> will also be interesting to watch. >> >>Well, what will really be interesting is what _you_ learn from things. > > Since you dismiss everything I've learned, you will have a very > dull life. But I don't automatically assume I will dismiss everything you learn in the future. Also, you mistake my comments. I dismiss what you claim to have learned from (for example) your biased books, I still find it interesting to see the tangents and dead ends your thinking heads down.
From: John Fields on 10 Dec 2006 12:55 On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 13:32:04 -0000, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:457BA0D7.3E14702D(a)hotmail.com... >> >> >> 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' ??? > >And apparently the US Department of Defence spends $1 million a year on >anti-gravity research. Amazing the things people will do because logic >escapes them. --- I see. You're the one who decides what is and what isn't possible? You're a goddam joke. -- JF
From: John Fields on 10 Dec 2006 13:42
On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 14:07:09 +0000, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> What will be interesting is how Poland's basic rules >> of society evolve over the decades. > >They'll have to obey Brussels instead of Moscow now. --- Well let's hope democracy sprouts from that relationship. -- JF |