Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 6 Oct 2006 05:38 In article <MPG.1f8ef2658cd2dcf4989d8d(a)News.Individual.NET>, Keith <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >In article <eg335h$5l0$10(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu >says... >> In article <eg2od9$8qk_004(a)s829.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >In article <VAVUg.13310$7I1.3298(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, >> > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >> >> >>"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> >>news:452415BE.DB0DBC1E(a)hotmail.com... >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Keith wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... >> >>>> >> >>>> > And you think you can defeat 'radical Islam' with bombs and bullets ? >> >>>> >> >>>> I know there is no choice. Perhaps you want to submit? >> >>> >> >>> There is no need to 'submit' >> >>> >> >>> You're living in a perversely stupid fantasy paranoid world. >> >> >> >>It comes from the constant bombardment by Bush's fear-mongering--it's his >> >>way of keeping power over people. >> > >> >I think you should start to listen to Bush instead of listening >> >to other people supposedly repeating what Bush said. I would >> >suggest you start with his January, 2006 TV speech. >> > >> >> People start to lose perspective on what >> >>is happening and why. It really is a very powerful narcotic. >> > >> >People can also lose perspective if they assume that Bush >> >is always wrong >> >> So what has he been right about? >> >> >and is the cause of all ills which is the >> >only thing you hear from his political opposition. >> > >> >This causes a lot of people to overlook the fact that these >> >same politicians do not intend to deal with the threat >> >to the nation. >> > >> >> Bush has increased the threat. His own NIE says so. > >You're in a fantasy land. ONE SENTENCE of the NIE report was >leaked by the Democrats to try to discredit Bush. The four pages >around that one sentence, later released, say exactly the opposite. >Please get your "news" from someone other than Franken. > Thanks. I did not know this. /BAH
From: Eeyore on 6 Oct 2006 06:42 Robert Latest wrote: > On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:58:29 -0700, > John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote > in Msg. <gchai2ligb29uejo28rjrpi78fkdonglhp(a)4ax.com> > > > But I consider trerrorism to be attacking non-combattant populations > > for political/emotional/morale reasons, which both sides did in WWII > > and I don't think the US is doing deliberately at present. > > At present, no. Deliberately, no. It is in fact difficult to make out > what the US are doing at present, and why they insist on doing it. > That's what causes a great deal of the alienation the US are > experiencing at the moment. The uproar about slippery email exchanges > between a politican and teenagers isn't helping the US to get into a > situation where they can be taken serious, either. In any normal country > the guy would simply be kicked out of office, tars and feathers and all > and be done with it. > > > The Cold War certainly helped hold western Europe together, and > > supressed the latent anti-Americanism until the Soviet empire > > collapsed and the Europeans felt they didn't need us any more. > > I really don't know where you see all that anti-Americansim. The > dominant sentiment among Europeans (including myself) is a huge > disappointment with what America has grown into recently. For much of > the world, especially Europe, America used to be the very definition of > freedom - not the least because it saved Western Europe not so much from > Hitler as from Soviet domination. Now we have to witness how that great > country is being run down by a bunch of religious goons and their > industry buddies. The feeling is more like grief, not hate. I agree. However the kind of response I get to really quite mild criticism does tend to make me wonder what the heck American's come to. Graham
From: John Fields on 6 Oct 2006 06:41 On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 23:46:14 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >Homer J Simpson wrote: > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message >> >> >> I'm saying that if someone threatens their fundamental freedoms, the >> >> British public will defend them. >> > >> > Hopefully. >> > >> > I grow less and less sure of this as I watch public debate each day. >> >> A mistake Hitler made. He read reports of pacifist debates in the UK and >> assumed they were a guide to the lack of response to be expected during an >> attack on Britain. >> >> The British Air Force response showed him the error of his ways. > >The Royal Air Force to be entirely accurate but yes, we were certainly far >from unready. In fact Britain's armaments industry had been working hard in >the years preceding WW2 to make the planes ( and other stuff ) we knew we >were going to need. --- And yet, had we not come to your rescue, you'd be dog meat today. -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
From: YD on 6 Oct 2006 06:51 On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:00:39 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >> YD wrote: >>> >>> Positively so. All you have left is posing as powerful know-it-alls on >>> the internet. > >You're going to have to stop trimming so much, so we can tell which group of >powerful know-it-alls you're talking about. Sometimes it's really hard to >tell the players without a scorecard. > >Eric Lucas > Don't blame me, it was already trimmed. - YD. -- Remove HAT if replying by mail.
From: John Fields on 6 Oct 2006 06:42
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 23:48:28 +0100, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >"John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote in message >news:ckd8i2d471ak7j75nlcnugpbk8j5th89v6(a)4ax.com... >> On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 19:06:05 +0100, Eeyore >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>John Fields wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 20:24:11 +0100, Eeyore >>>> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >Ever wondered why it [international terrorism] happens to the USA >>>> most btw ? >>>> >>>> --- >>>> Nope. Losers want to blame everyone but themselves for their >>>> predicaments and, so, take shots at the champ in an attemp to try to >>>> convince themselves that they're not impotent. >>> >>>Let me explain then. >>> >>>It becasue America pokes its nose into stuff that's none of its business >>>all the time and just generally likes to kick the little guys around. >> >> --- >> Translation: >> >> Because America has the wherewithal and the will to do whatever it >> wants to, and all the little guys resent that. >> > >Do Americans have a word for Bullying? > --- Yes, "bullying." -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer |