Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: JoeBloe on 7 Oct 2006 08:16 On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:47:21 +0200, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen" <frithiof.jensen(a)die_spammer_die.ericsson.com> Gave us: >Oh "we" Got It - Problem it that the people that make decisions for "us" all >have their own agenda; which does not involve more freedom and a better life for >"us". It does for "them", though. You're an idiot. Your header info proves it. What? Did Ericsson charge you too much for service such that you have to declare death on them? You are about as retarded as it gets, little boy.
From: JoeBloe on 7 Oct 2006 08:17 On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 13:28:37 +0200, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen" <frithiof.jensen(a)die_spammer_die.ericsson.com> Gave us: > >"Homer J Simpson" <nobody(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message >news:7_UTg.6718$N4.2442(a)clgrps12... >> >> "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >> news:enivh2llnec7iri7t0nd80qesmg32ca01o(a)4ax.com... >> >> > You idiots are representative of NOTHING except killing of civilians >> > in the most cowardly way there is. You don't even have the spine to >> > confront your enemies like real men. >> >> "... confront your enemies like real men" >> >> Bombing them with cruise missiles you mean???? > >Why not - a garage cruise missile would be a decent enough project. Make MAD >more democratic ;-) > You're both idiots.
From: jmfbahciv on 7 Oct 2006 07:14 In article <5dfVg.62$45.46(a)news.uchicago.edu>, mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >In article <eg2paa$8qk_011(a)s829.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>In article <PsRUg.57$45.150(a)news.uchicago.edu>, >> mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>In article <4523844C.CA22EFDF(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore >><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> writes: >>>> >>>> >>>>mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>> >>>>> In article <4522F8DE.C46161BD(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore writes: >>>>> >mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> >> You didn't read carefully. It is not "10% changing". It is that >>>>> >> historical data indicates dramatic changes when about 10% of the >>>>> >> population is *dead*. Does this make it clear? >>>>> > >>>>> >So, we only need to kill 100 million Muslims or so ? >>>>> > >>>>> I didn't say, at the moment, what we need (or need not) to do. I >>>>> pointed what empirical data for past conflicts shows. Go argue with >>>>> history if you don't like it. >>>> >>>>But you still mainatain we'd need to kill that many to have an effect ? >>>> >>>>Graham >>>> >>>Not that "we'd need" but that, as a worst case scenario, we may need. >> >>The oddity of this, which I cannot find in past history, is that >>the extremists are already doing this to themselves. >> >It is not that odd. Extremists are striving for a very high degreee >of coherence, in their own camp. This involves "purifying" your side >from "dubious elements". This is premature viewing and we won't know until 10-80 years from now but... It seems like they are not purifying but self-emolating. Isn't there a difference? This self-emolation as part of their ritual practice is what seems odd. And I don't think I've written this well at all. /BAH
From: JoeBloe on 7 Oct 2006 08:21 On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 01:42:13 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: > > >JoeBloe wrote: > >> On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 04:53:35 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" >> <nobody(a)nowhere.com> Gave us: >> >> >Facts you are unaware of? >> > >> >Other national: "I feel bad so I'll talk to my friends" >> > >> >American: "I feel bad so I'll murder some innocent people" >> > >> You're an idiot. Euro nations were slaughtering thousands long >> before we ever did. > >Most Americans are Europeans. > You're an idiot.
From: JoeBloe on 7 Oct 2006 08:30
On Thu, 05 Oct 06 09:51:29 GMT, lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) Gave us: >In article <lef8i2prust90bdlna6vmp1r0h9p7a7a95(a)4ax.com>, > Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)My-Web-Site.com> wrote: >>On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 22:52:37 GMT, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman(a)yahoo.com> >>wrote: >> >>>In article <peb8i2lf4af0irq171tqukscc9n0lec541(a)4ax.com>, >>> Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)My-Web-Site.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 21:51:21 GMT, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman(a)yahoo.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >In article <HLVUg.13315$7I1.5654(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, >>>> > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >> I don't care. If you're listening to a phone call to which the phone >in >>>> >> my >>>> >> living room is party, then as a citizen of the US, I demand that your >>>> >> listening be carried out according to my Constitutional rights. >>>> > >>>> > Probably is. Under a warrant for a phone anything that goes on over >>>> >that phone is legally admissable, even if the other person's phone >>>> >doesn't have a warrant on it. It well settled that as long as one phone >>>> >is legally tapped, any phone that calls it or is called by it is fair >>>> >game. Since there are no restrictions on tapping a phone outside of the >>>> >country, it would be legal tap. Thus anyone the phone calls or anyone >>>> >who calls the phone could be listened to as noted. Would be a rather >>>> >interesting case to make. >>>> >>>> And it varies state-by-state... it is legal in Arizona to record all >>>> calls on your own phone, _without_ notifying the other party. >>>> >>>> All I need to do is push a button ;-) >>> >>> There are two different things going on here. One is what you can >>>do as private citizen, which in AZ is that all are fair game. But we >>>were talking about what goverment (be it under the mantel of cop-dom or >>>spook-dom) can do. Whole 'nother kettle of fish.. >> >>Of course. But I can record and then hand over to the government, no >>sweat, no warrant, nada. >> >> ...Jim Thompson > >And it can be thrown out. And it can be restored by the highest court... which would do so. |