Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 14 Dec 2006 08:35 In article <4bdea$4580b8c1$4fe760c$31097(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> In article <op.tkayhaxz26l578(a)borek>, >> 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 ;) >> >> >> You must find us terribly naive. > >Slavic thought is pseudowestern. I was talking about how Poland has to be more sophisticated politically than westerners. We've had it too soft and over the years have left the work to be done by politiicans. One of the more dangerous problems the US has is that we elect politicians to be our administrators of public affairs. Over the years, the ones who are best at campaigning are the ones who get elected. Those who know how to do the work of administration are gradually culled out. The mess in New Orleans is an example. The governor didn't know how to get stuff done and reacted by throwing sound bytes out. The mayor also didn't know how to get stuff done when the option of greasing the axle with cash is not an option. Yet, people reelected the ones who don't know how to do the work of an administrator. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 14 Dec 2006 08:37 In article <da842$4580b903$4fe760c$31097(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> In article <1165669215.800813.245470(a)f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, >> hill(a)rowland.org wrote: >> >>>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. >> >> >> I'm not familiar with web-flavored coding. Would the next >> threshold be 100,000? Or is there another trick of the trade? > >Google would not let me read straight through the thread. It >kept recycling to day 1. I don't understand. I would assume that the last post has to have a pointer to the first post. /BAH
From: Lloyd Parker on 14 Dec 2006 03:39 In article <CdednXXP2-10wh3YRVnyhgA(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:elp63h$8qk_007(a)s896.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <elmh2m$88k$3(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>In article <457D707B.125ED31C(a)hotmail.com>, >>>Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>[.....] >>>>Secularism is speading. I believe what we are seeing may be no more than >>>>a >>>>religious backlash against 'modern thought'. I rather feel it's dommed to >> fail. >>>> >>>>As a kid I recall it was unheard of not to be Christian. Now no-one even >> blinks >>>>an eye about it but I would like to see our first atheist Prime Minister >> though. >>> >>>The trend is the other way in the US. A smallish fraction of "christian" >>>thinking has gained a large following and significant power since the >>>1940s. The real threat (long term) of extremists is from the home grown >>>ones. >> >> That danger is now secondary in a list of priorities. The danger >> will disppear if Western civilization is destroyed. > >Well, as the chances of "western civilisation" being destroyed in less than >a generation or two is almost non-existent, it seems this is a more pressing >concern. > > I love these right-wingers. Man can't damage the earth with CFCs or global warming, but a few radicals can destroy western civilization.
From: Ken Smith on 14 Dec 2006 09:42 In article <elritl$8qk_004(a)s953.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >In article <elqdjs$8mh$2(a)blue.rahul.net>, > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>In article <elp63h$8qk_007(a)s896.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>In article <elmh2m$88k$3(a)blue.rahul.net>, >>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: [....] >>No, that danger is the one that has the greatest odds of being the one >>that destroys western civilization. > >I'm not talking about odds. I'm talking about setting priorities. You can't set priorities if you don't examine the odds. There is a chance that my house could be hit by a crashing aircraft in the next 30 seconds. It would kill my wife if it hits the bedroom. I, however, gave making the morning coffee a higher priority than waking her up. She can catch a little extra sleep while it brews. Given the stress of trying to figure out what to get people for xmass, she could use the little extra sleep. >>The rot from within is by far the greated danger. > >Not any more. If there is no Western civilization, there >is none of this rot by defintion. You have a piece of wood. >It a bit of rot in the middle. So you spend your time working >on removing the rot. All of sudden, you find you are in the >middle of a forest fire. Is it prudent to spend your time >working on the spot of rot or put out the fire so that the >rot spot will still exist so can work on it? The problem is that you see some light a match, and think it is a forest fire. While you are panicing about that, this soaking wet bit of rotting wood that is being eaten from within by termites and is about to fail bringing your house down. Your hero, meanwhile, is out there near the guy with the match about to spray him with gasoline in an attempt to put out the "forest fire". Your guard dog has rabies, there are anopheles mosquitoes in the pool, and the rats have fleas. All of these escape your notice because you see a match burning. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: Ken Smith on 14 Dec 2006 09:47
In article <elrj0l$8qk_005(a)s953.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >In article <4580F3D5.389037B1(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>> >Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> >>Secularism is speading. I believe what we are seeing may be no more than >a >>> >>religious backlash against 'modern thought'. I rather feel it's dommed to >>> >>fail. >>> >> >>> >>As a kid I recall it was unheard of not to be Christian. Now no-one even >>> >>blinksan eye about it but I would like to see our first atheist Prime >>> Minister >>> >>though. >>> > >>> >The trend is the other way in the US. A smallish fraction of "christian" >>> >thinking has gained a large following and significant power since the >>> >1940s. The real threat (long term) of extremists is from the home grown >>> >ones. >>> >>> That danger is now secondary in a list of priorities. The danger >>> will disppear if Western civilization is destroyed. >> >>And who's exactly going to *destroy* it ? > >It is a stated goal by people we call Islamic extremists. If >you haven't noticed, they have been making a lot of progress >towards that goal. There are lots of people with lots of stated goals. The progress towards the destruction of western civilization has been made by the neocons not the Islamists. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge |