Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 31 Jan 2007 08:35 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> > >>>Right, so putting directed surveillance on who a person contacts means you > >>>cant watch where their cash flows? > >> > >> Not easily. > > > >This is nonsense. Watching electronic cash flows is irrelevant to officers > >following the suspect. Following the suspect means they can _also_ watch for > >real world cash transactions. > > You have been watching too much TV. It's a fact that criminals prefer cash. Graham
From: T Wake on 31 Jan 2007 08:35 "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:45C0944C.DE540314(a)hotmail.com... > > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >> >> > >> >> >No. If you go around opening the cage door on rabid pitbulls, you >> >> >are >> >> >responsible for people getting bitten. >> >> >> >> I'm glad you agree with me about keeping these types locked up. >> > >> >It doesn't have to mean physically locked up. >> >> With today's transportation technology, it does. There is no >> Australia-type piece of land to keep them from making messes >> in other peoples' backyards. > > It's a shame there isn't a suitable island somewhere really. > > I'd prefer to see Islamist trouble makers deported to a Muslim country > rather > than locked up. I doubt the Muslim country that was on the receiving end of these nutjobs would be too happy.
From: Eeyore on 31 Jan 2007 08:36 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > So, physically tailing one person will only track his mess > making activities...maybe. Unless you can follow him directly > into the mosque where assignments are made and supplies handed > out So you're now claiming all mosques are trouble too ? Graham
From: jmfbahciv on 31 Jan 2007 08:35 In article <epl3ru$6ev$9(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <epku7f$8qk_009(a)s957.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>In article <epgg4o$a46$5(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>>In article <M9GdnS-x7KLMOSbYnZ2dnUVZ8qugnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>>T Wake <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>[....] >>>>Which country has invaded the US? >>> >>>Pakistan. Didn't you hear about 7/11. :) >>> >>> >>> >>>Note to nonUSAians: Yes, that is a joke. 7/11 is a type of store and a >>>stereotype is that they are run by pakistanies. >>> >>Those people really like our brand of capitalism. Do you think >>they want to go back to the "old ways"? > >Your arument seems to have turned on it heals here. Not at all. These people are very good at surviving no matter what the politics are. The way Muslims survive, when they are in the moderate category, is to keep their mouths shut and never say no to violent faction of their community. Until these moderates believe that there is a country who will protect them with all its military might, they aren't going to dare to say no to the violent factions. For the last two years, before the US' Novemeber elections, the moderates started to talk against the violence. Then the Democrats took majority in Congress. Now the moderates will shut up and see if those Democrats will protect them. It took Bush 6 years to get these moderates to voice their opinions. It took about 1 week for the Democrats to shut them up. These moderates have to learn to talk back to the Democrats who aren't dealing with the real problems. It will take time for these moderates to figure that out and take a chance. I don't think there is enough time for that to happen. /BAH
From: Eeyore on 31 Jan 2007 08:43
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > > > >> None of this stopped the IRA from bombing. > > > >How many IRA bombing attempts were prevented? > > You allowed them to continue to make messes for almost a century. A century ? Your claims are getting increasingly bizarre. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_IRA " Since its emergence in 1969........................ " > The US has no patience for that. We are used to identifying a job > and getting it done to completion and then going on to the next > job. Surely a joke ! Graham |