Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: unsettled on 25 Jan 2007 18:22 Ken Smith wrote: > In article <99bfe$45b5ff6b$4fe7715$22034(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > [....] > >>Untrue. You keep coming back to "the US removed Saddam allowing >>all the deaths to occur" then in the next breath say you're not >>blaming the US. > > > Billy-Bob opened the cage door on the rabid pitbull. He now says "but but > but I didn't bite anyone". > > You're running rabid again.
From: unsettled on 25 Jan 2007 18:58 Lloyd Parker wrote: > In article <4b867$45b7d141$4fe74e1$20240(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > >>Ken Smith wrote: >> >> >>>In article <7539e$45b764bc$4fe7370$11158(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>>unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>>[.....] >>> >>> >>>>Unless they're held under conditions not acceptable to some >>>>of our "friends" they'll continue with their program from >>>>jail. >>> >>> >>>This is simply false and I believe beneath you. >> >>For Christs sakes it has been done. The lawyer is in >>prison for being the carrier. Get a grip already. >> >>These people need to be held under conditions which don't >>allow any communication with the outside. That includes >>prevention of contact with randomly chosen or appointed >>lawyers and clergy. > > > And if we were a fascist state, you'd be right. I'm right anyway. > Unfortunately, we've got that > pesky bill of rights. Bullshit like this is easy enough to type, but impossible to demonstrate. Which Amendment is it that prohibits holding a dangerous terrorist incommunicado? > I know you right-wingers hate it. Make you feel good to write that? It has no other value than to make you feel good. >>I can hear the objections already. > Yes, the US constitution, which you despise. Show me.
From: unsettled on 25 Jan 2007 19:02 MassiveProng wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:59:26 -0500, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> Gave us: > > >>Not so much needed anymore. The electronics are much better. > > > > So, the cost difference is minimal, so why quit making good cases... > Less noise out it less noise out. The cost to make a good case is not minimal at all.
From: Eeyore on 25 Jan 2007 19:09 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > >> You keep assuming that these people are deterred by Western > >> civilization laws and the punishments associated with breaking > >> them. You have an invalid assumption. > > > >And you keep thinking the answer is to lock up ppl on *suspicion* alone ! > > So far, until methods can be created to deal with this catefory of > people, yes. The category known as *suspects* ? > England extended the minimum holding time. To a period long enough for the police to search for and find sufficient evidence to convict. > That's not going to be an adequate change. It's worked just fine so far. > There will have to be more as new methods of attack are created and carried > out. What have terrorist 'methods' got to do with investigating a crime ? > >That's unacceptable in a civilised society. > > You mean, a Western civilized society. No, any decent civilised society. Graham
From: unsettled on 25 Jan 2007 19:11
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > In article <45B7614D.A323D015(a)hotmail.com>, > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >>> jasen <jasen(a)free.net.nz> wrote: >>> >>>>On 2007-01-20, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Please measure the miles between Israel and the Mediteranean. >>>> >>>>0 >>>> >>>> >>>>>Note the number of miles between Israel and the Suez Canal. >>>> >>>>about 120 at closest approach, 140 from Beersheba, 160 from Tel Aviv >>>> >>>> >>>>>Now consider that Iran does its atomic bomb testing on >>>>>Israel soil. How long do you think the Canal will be closed? >>>>>You may assume that Iran doesn't "miss" and take out the >>>>>core of Egyptian commerce with the same single attack. >>>> >>>>at that range? a couple of months. >>> >>>Possibly, if all political winds blow exactly the correct way. >>>I can't even guess the effects of no oil tankers delivering >>>oil for a couple of months. From Thatcher's book about her >>>government and the coal miners' strikes, England had about >>>3 months reserve. >> >>Of *COAL* ! > > > Yes, child. If no oil is delivered, then your country > will have to use its coal reserves. Right? Which they import. With no oil tankers, the coal suppliers will not ship to UK because they'll need the coal in their own countries. How long will it take to reopen the UK coal mines? The Scotts will have to march southwards to keep from freezing to death. |