Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 5 Oct 2006 16:18 John Fields wrote: > On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 00:46:43 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >I'm saying that if someone threatens their fundamental freedoms, the British public will defend them. You should approve of that. > > --- > Yes, I would, but I think if they're sufficiently demonized what's > more likely is that if your government decides that it's boxcars and > death camps for them, Simply not going to happen. Under what bizarre circumstances exactly could you imagine this ? > then you'll watch 'em get loaded up just like > the good non-Jewish citizens of Germany did about 60 years ago. You're a very sad person. Graham
From: Homer J Simpson on 5 Oct 2006 16:20 <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:yecVg.8912$GR.1933(a)newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... > Oh, and there is also a Federal law that say in any recording of a phone > conversation, at least one of the parties to the conversation must be > aware of the recording. IIRC, Federal law makes it a crime to disclose illegally obtained material. So if you tap your calls to your married lover to get him to admit killing his wife that gets thrown out in an all party state - except in Modesto CA.
From: Eeyore on 5 Oct 2006 16:20 John Fields wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >T Wake wrote: > >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote.. > >> > >> > That's very hypothetical but I reckon I'd fight against any tyranny > >> > suppressing important freedoms. > >> > >> Aha, you only defend "Important" freedoms. Ok. > > > >It was meant to be emphasis about *fighting*. > > --- > Busted!!! > > If it was, you would have written: > > "That's very hypothetical but I reckon I'd fight against any tyranny > suppressing freedom." So ? Graham
From: Eeyore on 5 Oct 2006 16:22 "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > The dumbass doesn't > realize it would use more fuel to move a heavier bus through two routes, > than two lighter busses. It would make the kids have to wait longer for > their ride, and they would get home even later. Since when were 2 routes involved ? The original issue was one of students of different ages being picked up on the *same* routes FYI. Graham
From: Kurt Ullman on 5 Oct 2006 16:22
In article <4525683A.3582AE66(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > That's why Governments need to be involved to do the stuff the *ought* to be > done rather than stuff that just makes a fast buck. > What ought to be done? Why is government better able than the free market (including the free market of getting donations to support private research like that done by MDA, St. Judes, etc.) There are a bunch of studies that show little correlation between government funding and the number of people with the disease, costs of care, impact on the economy, etc. Government health care bucks are every bit as much as a pork barrel as the transportation bill. Political in extreme and having nothing to do with what ought to be done. |