Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 5 Oct 2006 04:58 lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > Gordon wrote: > >> On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 18:46:00 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" wrote: > >> >"Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message > >> > > >> >>>Clinton was successful. > >> >>> > >> >>>Bush is a failure. > >> >> > >> >> Unless you assume some really bad things about his motives that is. > >> > > >> >9/11 was Bush's failure. > >> > >> How long had Bush been in office when 9/11 occurred? Who was in > >> office the 8 years before that? > > Well, if you're going to play that ridiculous game...what party was in > office for 12 years before that, and 20 of the past 24? Surely *they* > deserve a lot of the blame too, with such an extended stay in power.... > > The Republicans need to stop trying to blame everybody else. Condoleeza > Rice said she was unable to recall having had a meeting with the longtime > anti-terrorism "czar" (I can picture his face, but his name escapes me at > the moment) in July 2001, when that meeting has actually been *verified* to > have taken place, and has been *verified* to have included his plan for > continued action to protect us from al Qaeda. She was so completely > uninterested in terrorism, that she couldn't even remember having been > briefed on the issue. Clinton may not have succeeded in taking out bin > Laden, but it's quite clear that the current administration took their eye > off the ball in a way that has proven to have been far more dangerous. To > attempt to lay that entirely in the laps of the Clinton administration is > just simply not tenable. > > Eric Lucas That's Gordon you should be addressing there not me btw. Graham
From: Eeyore on 5 Oct 2006 05:02 "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > T Wake wrote: > > > > Soon Teacher will turn up to put a stop to this playground fight. > > Really? Do you know why the teacher left? He's out making book on > the fight, and the odds are in our favor. In your dreams. Graham
From: Eeyore on 5 Oct 2006 05:03 "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > T Wake wrote: > > > > When we all have to carry ID cards I will know the "war" is indeed over. > > You don't have a driver's license? Don't be so silly. Graham
From: Robert Latest on 5 Oct 2006 05:21 ["Followup-To:" header set to sci.electronics.design.] On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 14:41:27 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in Msg. <k4a8i29r7fefoc7u4d8ja0k5psaubo2s76(a)4ax.com> > The history of Europe is the history of war. The earliest Greek > writings that survive are tales of war. Europe has been at war for > most of the last 3000 years, The history of the US is no less war-ridden than that of Europe except that it is much shorter. This is as unfair a comparison as that between a single nation (the US) with only two borders and a not very well-defined conglomerate of dozens of nations and cultures (Europe). > culminating in the "total war" of the > 20th century, killing tens of millions of non-combattants, surely the > largest-scale terrorism in world history. I entirely and heartily agree, but I'm surprised to hear that from you. If I were in your position I'd be careful when labeling acts of war as terrorism. You're running the risk of having to call American aggression terrorism, and we sure want to avoid that association. > It was the American occupation, Pax Americana, that enforced 60 years > of peace in Europe for the first time in millennia. That statement is about as true as saying that it was the Soviet regime that enforced those decades of peace. The only thing that kept things quiet in Europe was the fear of both the US and the USSR to get wiped off the face of the planet should they try anything stupid. That period is commonly referred to as the "Cold War", not "Peace". robert
From: Robert Latest on 5 Oct 2006 05:24
["Followup-To:" header set to sci.electronics.design.] On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 19:22:41 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in Msg. <7pq8i2t26e02tutk5nbakmv4jm1rtrg73s(a)4ax.com> > I didn't like FT; it was stupid situation/embarassment comedy like "I > Love Lucy", nowhere near Monte Python level. Have you seen the recent BBC series, "Extras"? It's as close as it gets to MP, though entirely different. robert |