Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 6 Oct 2006 16:46 Kurt Ullman wrote: > In article <n3mci2p9ah579tq4d38b7emv85ksafipu1(a)4ax.com>, > John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: > > > >What do you think about the Vincennes shooting down an Iranian Airbus then ? > > > > From: > > > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/3/newsid_4678000/4678707 > > .stm > > > > "The USS Vincennes had tracked the plane electronically and warned > > it to keep away. When it did not the ship fired two surface-to-air > > missiles, at least one of which hit the airliner." > > > > I think the airplane's pilot should have had the good sense to heed > > the Vincennes' warning. > > It is sorta the height of moral equivalancy to suggest that an > accident that we attempted to avoid by warning the plane is anywhere > near the same as anything else being discussed. In any case the warning went out on a military frequency to the pilot of "Iranian F-14". Graham
From: Eeyore on 6 Oct 2006 16:48 Kurt Ullman wrote: > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: > > Kurt Ullman <kurtullman(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > >In article <eg3143$okg$2(a)blue.rahul.net>, > > > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: > > >> > > >> On (2) we have external evidence that he did try to get OBL. It was all > > >> over the news and the Neocons yelled "wag the dog" about it. > > > > > > If he did not consistently get interested in OBL about the time > > >Monica was to testify, etc., he might not have heard that as much. > > > > Do you have any proof of either part of that? > > Google the attacks and monica's testimony. Look at the dates. Stare > in wild wonder. Could you elaborate on what you mean there ? Graham
From: Michael A. Terrell on 6 Oct 2006 16:49 John Larkin wrote: > > Well, they do bring up some subjects that are interesting, and give me > opportunities to practice my writing styles. And, actually, conversing > with fat, unhappy European neurotics makes me appreciate my life and > my country even more! > > John Amen! Good food and a good day at the range shooting Eurotrolls. What could be better? The reason they taste like chicken? They ARE Chickens! ;-) -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: Michael A. Terrell on 6 Oct 2006 16:51 T Wake wrote: > > "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:45267813.5DB5BB6D(a)earthlink.net... > > well, you know, its always open season > > on trolls. No limit! ;-) > > Yes we know. That is why you get replies. True, you trolls know no shame. ;-) -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: T Wake on 6 Oct 2006 16:53
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:4526C068.6208AD06(a)earthlink.net... >T Wake wrote: > >> Here we reach the crux of the problem. I am an able bodied veteran yet >> you >> implied I was a terrorist if I didn't want people to intercept my >> communications. > > No, i asked if you have nothing to hide, why are you worried? I > guess the Brits are more fucked up than I gave them credit for. Your exact quote (which is now snipped from above but remains below) was: "Unless you are a terrorist, what are you worried about?" I am sure I can see the word terrorist there. I have nothing to hide. Because I have nothing to hide I object to people checking out things unless I choose to let them. You really do have issues with choice dont you. >> >> It seems you dont want people you dont approve of having _your_ personal >> detail either. >> >> > I don't have a bank account, I have a Credit Union account, which you >> > didn't ask about. The movement already has that information, and you >> > as >> > a foreigner have no right to ask. >> >> Which brings me right back in a circle. You really do have a short >> attention >> span dont you. > > > Wouldn't you like to know. > Brilliance. IKWYBWAI. >> I said it was wrong for _your_ country to intercept my communication. You >> said "Unless you are a terrorist, what are you worried about?" >> >> It is heart warming to know that double standards remain firmly in place. > > > Repeating yourself? Maybe. It seems I have to as your short attention span sends this conversation in circles. I dont mind doing it though - there is always the off chance that something will get through to you. I am impressed by how obvious you make it when you dont have a sensible answer. Talking (in the USENET) to you is similar to talking to a seven year old - except I know they will grow up. >> > Movements? Well, I haven't had one yet today, but thanks for asking. >> > I'll send it to you for your investigation if you need it. >> >> You haven't had one but it is aware of your Credit Union account? >> Strange. >> >> > If you want to know who I talk to, hire a P.I. I don't feel like >> > asking everyone I have to talk to their names, because it isn't my >> > business to ask. Even if I did, they have no reason to tell me. >> > You're >> > the security expert so it should be really easy for you to investigate >> > me. >> > >> > BTW, don't bother with an IP lookup, it shows the wrong city. >> > >> >> You must be a terrorist then. You are refusing to reveal your activities >> and >> your IP points somewhere else. > > > Like I have control over someone else's data base. They keep changing > the city, but they still haven't got it right. I dont care. The issue this was about is the rights of people and the right to be presumed innocent. Because _you_ claim the IP address resolves differently through no fault of your own is fine in the good world. The bad one this debate is about gives you no latitude. There is doubt so you should be detained until every single detail of your life can be examined by people who have no reason to be subjected to public oversight. >> What are you trying to hide here? > > > I have nothing to hide. Why are you pulling a Joe McCarthy? Aha. The worm turns. >> My role in security is not to spy on people it is to prevent it happening >> where appropriate and prevent break ins (mainly). > > > Then you ask too many questions for your own good. The first defence of a terrorist thug. > My last job was > building communications equipment for government agencies, and I was > check out more than once. Not by me. I have also submitted to government vetting in the past. I have even been vetted by the US government at one point. I chose to apply for the job and volunteered the information. I realise you cant see the significance of that, which is a shame. Don't you have some circuit boards to play with? |