Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 23 Jan 2007 09:21 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: > > > >>JMF was using a VT05. His screen would duplicate on my black > >>and white TV two rooms over (about 25 feet). I warned him > >>to tell me when he was going online and then I'd turn my TV > >>off. > >> > > You should have "warned him" to repair the emissions issue, or the > >FCC would do it for him. > > They didn't exist then Oh yes they did. Graham
From: Eeyore on 23 Jan 2007 09:24 unsettled wrote: > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > Thank you. I'm finding that not many people understand the > > difference nor the consequences. It is worrisome. > > Problem solved. Representative government. Which version ? First past the post ? Proportional reperesentation ? Electoral college ? To name a few. Graham
From: jmfbahciv on 23 Jan 2007 09:20 In article <vMednUyO_cVojSvYnZ2dnUVZ8qydnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:ep51pu$8qk_004(a)s826.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <UNOdnfbDoKbweSnYnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:eonuch$8qk_001(a)s887.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> In article <45AF76BD.DD7EB5F5(a)hotmail.com>, >>> >>> >>><snip> >>>> >>>> Sigh! So you don't like my use of the word civilization either. >>>> >>><snip> >>> >>>Part of the problem is you have an almost arbitrary definition of words. >>>These words often have a different definition in more common use, but you >>>stick to the word fitting your meaning. >>> >>>In addition, you seem obsessed with giving complex concepts single word >>>definitions - this is flawed. >> >> Naming things was part of my job. I do it as naturally as breathing. > >OK, try to realise that this works better with software than concepts. I know that. So I asked for word to describe certain concepts. All I've gotten so far is smoke and mirrors and rotten bullshit. > >>> >>>Still, I doubt you'll change and I suspect you like tilting at windmills - >>>the verbal confusion just helps create more windmills. >> >> This is all bullshit on your part. I have asked you for nouns to >> use in this thread and everybody has blown smoke across the >> request. > >Ha. You demand a noun to use and anything else is "bullshit." You are >insane, aren't you? You are the one who says I must use a different word. So I asked you for a word to use when I write these posts. So far, you have not provided one. Could this omission be due to the fact that I am using the correct words? <snip> /BAH
From: Eeyore on 23 Jan 2007 09:35 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > > > >When you say Italy let terrorists go, what country had already found the > >people guilty of terrorism? > > So, the only time the people, who have an intent to destroy Western > civilization infrastructure and population, can be held in jail > is after they have been convicted. Of course not. They can be remanded for trial if a criminal charge is brought against them. > Italy had the same legal opinion and let them go. They disappeared. Who were these people ? > If you insist on following your legalities that assume the nation > is at peace, then you have to assume that a Muslim extremist > is innocent until proven guilty. That is indeed the rule of law. > But, wait! He hasn't made > any messes yet. So you can't arrest him. If your police do > manage to arrest him, he can pay the bail and be free to continue > his plans to make a mess. No - the police can object to bail where there's a public risk and a judge may not be willing to grant bail anyway. > If you insist that these people be treated as criminals, then > you should be ready to cope with an interruption in your > life-style. It's been discussed here and voted on in the UK Parliament. The Police have powers to hold terrorist suspects for up to 30 days ( IIRC ) without charge subject to regular judicial review. After that time they must indeed be released or charged. Any longer was rejected by Parliament. Graham
From: Eeyore on 23 Jan 2007 09:37
T Wake wrote: > "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message > > > > Time has no hold on bias. People are just as biased about > > an event that happened 5 minutes ago as one that happened > > 36,500 days ago. Your persistent America bashing shows your > > bias despite the internet and TV, so it isn't a communications > > and information issue. > > It is a shame you think I am bashing America. I think America has a lot > going for it and should be prepared to live up to the high standards. I agree. > Your comments seem to imply America is a barbaric nation, where suspected > criminals are denied their rights and convicted prisoners are treated in an > arbritrarily cruel manner. But I am the one bashing America. Curious isn't it. Americans actually seem to proud of their 'rougher edges'. Graham |