Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 29 Jan 2007 09:45 unsettled wrote: > Questions of this general sort (push the button) are > asked in better MBA seminars. That doubtless helps explain how useless MBAs are. Graham
From: Eeyore on 29 Jan 2007 09:47 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: > >> > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >>Even a representative democracy needs to have some way to deal > >> >>with the people who go after little kids, and make other kinds > >> >>of messes. A democracy does not, and never has, meant that > >> >>all people can do anything they want without punishment. > >> > > >> >Democracies create laws and enforce them to deal with such issues. > >> > >> Those laws apply to the citizens of that country during peace time. > > > >And in wartime too. > > No. You need to learn about your country's war powers and how > much of your peacetime freedoms were suspended during WWII. Nonsense. How about an example ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 29 Jan 2007 09:48 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > >> They believe your laws are contrary to their religious laws. > > > >So ? It doesn't matter. Our laws apply anyway. If they break them they are > >criminals. > > If they don't break your laws, they break their religious law, > as preached to them by their imans and clerics. Which one should > they choose? The Koran tells them they must obey the law of the land where they live. Graham
From: Eeyore on 29 Jan 2007 09:55 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >Our judges keep out of politics. > >> >> > >> >> Sure they do. > >> > > >> >Are you being sarcastic ? > >> > >> Yes :-). > >> > >> > I suggest you don't try that on with stuff you have > >> >zero knowledge about. > >> > >> They are humans. Most humans can't help but dabble in politics. > > > >My understanding is that they're expected to keep out of party politics. > > You should air out your back rooms once in a while. Your White > Hall (I think that's the name) never asks judges to do certain > things and they never comply? The judiciary is independent here. They are neither political appointees nor answerable to government. > Your history allowed the ruler to orchestrate things. What on earth is that supposed to mean ? You've gone barking mad again. > >> >Our judges have to be politically impartial since they are > >> >occasionally called on to rule about the legality of government > >> >legislation. They do turn some of it > >> >over from time to time. > >> > >> What rule book do these judges use so they can try to be > >> impartial. There is no such thing as an impartial human > >> being. > > > >Have you heard of this thing called 'judgement'. I expect > >our judges to have good judgement. > > All of your judges are perfect and not infallible and cannot > be bought, bribed nor ordered to take certain actions? They may be fallible but I'm sure they're capable of resisting being bribed or 'bought'. Nor can they be ordered what to do by government. > Oh, my dear, you do have a lot of growing up to do. That would be you. It is possible to have a better system than the USA you know. > >The only complaint I've heard about them is from politicians who get > >angry that judges sometimes over-rule them when the politicians excede their > >powers. > > I think you should read some more books. If that's where you get your insane ideas, I'll give that a miss actually. Graham
From: Eeyore on 29 Jan 2007 09:58
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >unsettled wrote: > > > >> Only losing nations and their executives ever face the > >> consequences. No nation or national executive engages > >> in war with the thought of losing. > > > >Hmmmm, well there's more than few in the UK who would like to see Tony Blair > >prosecuted for war crimes. > > Under whose law? Islam's? Under British law you nitwit. Britain is a signatory to the Geneva Conventions you know. > >Channel 4 TV even made the concept into a 2 part drama. > > And this doesn't worry you about the hidden agenda of your media? What's hidden ? Graham |