Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: lucasea on 7 Oct 2006 12:37 "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:jt4fi2hpqhls5ujcahaasrq2jvcle25rhe(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 21:59:40 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> Gave us: > >>Yep. And isn't it also ironic that the ouster of those very commies has >>been one of the destabilizing forces in the world that may well have >>furthered the current mess? > > > You're an idiot. Ya gotta love his nuanced and repetitive view of the world, ladies and gentlemen. Eric Lucas
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 13:00 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eg80it$8qk_002(a)s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <4_idnbX0z-W0FLrYRVny2w(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:eg7t54$8qk_003(a)s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <zuWdnToy_6qB6rvYRVnytA(a)pipex.net>, >>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>news:eg5e55$8qk_007(a)s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>> In article <452633ED.B02A967A(a)hotmail.com>, >>>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >> another possibility is >>>>>>> >> the goal is to cede to these extremists >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >Are you really that monumentally stupid ? >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >Listening to their greivances isn't 'ceding' btw. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Arafat used this tactic. He kept people at the table talking >>>>>>> about peace to give his side time to accumulate weapons. He >>>>>>> even got all these rich countries to fund his efforts. >>>>>> >>>>>>You're suggesting that because one person did this then we must never >>>>>>again listen ? That's a very blinkered view indeed. >>>>> >>>>> It is a tactic that worked. >>>> >>>>Is it? Has Israel ceased to exist now? >>> >>> Those people have not acquired an instant gratification addiction. >>> They think in terms of decades and centuries. >> >>So sying it "worked" is inappropriate, "working" is as much as you can >>assume. Even then it is tenuous as the working / not working argument has >>equal support. >> >>> Arafat got billions >>> of dollars by talking peace while actually doing the opposite. >>>> >>>>> Don't you think others will try >>>>> the same thing if it succeeds in fooling all of the Democrats >>>>> all of the time? >>>> >>>>Logical fallacy. >>> >>> Apparently. >>>> >>>>>>You can't change attitudes with bullets. >>>>> >>>>> My attitude changed. And the trigger was two little airplane >>>>> missles. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Yet, you think doing the same to the other side will change their >>>>attitude >>>>in a different manner? Ok, that makes sense. >>> >>> Not little missles. Clinton lobbed a couple of little missles and >>> it didn't stop them. These people do not care who nor how many >>> die. It is their stated goal to kill millions. >> >>Who is this they of which you speak? > > Islamic extremists. Bin Laden has declared it. Ok, where should we send the bigger missiles to kill Bin Laden? How many other people are we allowed to kill in order that we _eventually_ take out UBL? > Iran has > declared this goal. Really? The president of Iran has declared it is the intention of his country to kill millions? Could you point me in the direction of an example of this please > Clerics wish to remove all vestiges Oh, I thought we were talking about killing millions. Also, do you mean _only_ Islamic clerics or all religious fanatics? > of Western civilzation; this includes no freedom of the press, Which we [tinw] are in the process of eroding ourselves. > TV and probably all computers (anything with a picture of a human > being), Which Islamic countries do this? > all women in chattel (this is 50% of the labor force), Which Islamic country puts all its women in chattel? > public schools will shut down, private property will no longer > be allowed, banks will be closed so trade will have to revert > back to person-to-person bartering. Sorry, I am not sure where you get the model for this from. The Taliban were an extreme form of Government who fit the mould you discuss better than any others (women did work though and trade was certainly more than person to person bartering), yet at no point did the Taliban ever express a desire to export their "brand" of worship. Most Islamic states in existence now do not conform to any of the things you have described. What I can assume is that you have taken the "demands" of a few firebrand clerics as indicative of the desires of _all_ extremist groups. There is (based on the suggested responses) also the apparent implication that this desire is shared by Islamic states themselves. This is not far from assuming the ranting of a demented Christian cleric is indicative of the desires of America.
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 13:07 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eg7tss$8qk_007(a)s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <P6-dnSajh_Dt4LvYnZ2dnUVZ8qudnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>news:eg5el9$8qk_011(a)s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> In article <452634AB.3341D603(a)hotmail.com>, >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>> >>>>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >That said, you are nitpicking in the same manner. More than ten times >>>>> >as >>>>> >many people die every year as died as a result of the 11 Sep 01 >>>>> >attack. >>> That >>>>> >is TEN attacks of that scale (and that was a large scale attack by >>> anyone's >>>>> >standards) every single year. Year in, year out and accepted as a >>>>> >normal >>>>> >risk in life. >>>>> > >>>>> >Amazing really. >>>>> >>>>> So much for mess prevention. So how many people does Bin Laden >>>>> have to kill before you deal with this problem? 300,000? >>>>> 3,000,000? 300,000,000? A billion? >>>> >>>>What makes you think any of the above are even remotely possible ? >>> >>> Because I can think of one that will kill a billion in less >>> than 1/2 year. If I can think it, they certainly can. They >>> were brought in a culture that admires killing; I wasn't. >> >>I can think about space aliens invading and making everyone die their hair >>red. Doesn't mean it is going to happen. >> >>You can deal with things you _think_ will happen or deal with things which >>are happening. >> >>I know which makes more sense to me. > > I understand what makes more sense to you. I was brought up to > take action if I can see that a big mess is about to be made > if nothing is done. > > I still think this is a difference between males and females. You have become fixated with this "mess prevention" and, at best, it is a very poor analogy. In reality, the efforts being taken to prevent the "big mess" are causing a bigger mess. It is a bit like throwing a hand grenade into your living room to stop the carpet getting dirty. Bringing in some irrelevant comment about gender difference does nothing to support your argument. You have no idea as to the real gender of the people you are conversing with.
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 13:09 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eg7u2a$8qk_008(a)s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <eg5tpm$70s$13(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, > lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >>In article <eg57l7$8ss_011(a)s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>In article <P4Kdnb9ApIGR47jYRVnyrw(a)pipex.net>, >>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in >>>>message >>>>news:qkrai2hvpp43t4lpu1ttca9tpq8ueb94qr(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:03:17 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Which one would that be, the dangers of driving on the nation's >>>>>>highways? >>>>>>That's at least 3 orders of magnitude greater of a real threat to >>>>>>every >>>>>>person in the country than is terrorism. >>>>> >>>>> 3000 people died at the WTC. Three orders of magnitude from that is 3 >>>>> million. We kill about 40K people a year in car accidents. >>>>> >>>> >>>>3000 people (not all of whom were US citizens) have been killed by >>>>Islamic >>>>terrorist attacks on the Mainland US in (shall we say 80 years). How >>>>many >>>>have died in car accidents in that time? >>>> >>>>That said, you are nitpicking in the same manner. More than ten times as >>>>many people die every year as died as a result of the 11 Sep 01 attack. > That >>>>is TEN attacks of that scale (and that was a large scale attack by >>>>anyone's >>>>standards) every single year. Year in, year out and accepted as a normal >>>>risk in life. >>>> >>>>Amazing really. >>> >>>So much for mess prevention. So how many people does Bin Laden >>>have to kill before you deal with this problem? 300,000? >>>3,000,000? 300,000,000? A billion? >>> >> >>So why aren't we devoting all our resources to getting him? > > Because this intent to destroy all traces of Western civilization > is not isolated to one human being. No, the intent is not isolated to _one_ human being. It is not just Asians, Muslims, Men or any other sub group of humanity you wish to stereotype which harbours people intent on destroying that which you hold dear. How will you decide where to draw the line?
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 13:13
"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:574fi2hilri6ib7i7r5pkm3fuokhvbaap4(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 10:03:20 +0100, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >> >>"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >>news:g6udi2h3s876tsd4igje6qo10872ndlq2t(a)4ax.com... >>> On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 18:09:56 +0100, "T Wake" >>> <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >>> >>>>You would never know if you had 15 seconds as I very, very much doubt >>>>you >>>>can count that high. >>> >>> I can juggle 15 imaginary numbers around, while you piddle fart >> >>I can juggle imaginary elephants. Beat that. >> >>> around with counting the digits of one hand. >> >>Wow. Good comeback. >> >>> Try again, asswipe. >> >>Ok, what other imaginary things shall we pretend we can juggle? >> > > I knew that you wouldn't get it, dumbfuck. Oooops! One of your > elephants just fell on you. Shame it was unable to crush that geode > skull of yours. It is ok, it was an imaginary elephant. In the real world, imaginary things cant hurt you. As an aside, I know what imaginary numbers *are* and I also know there is no way *you* are juggling them. You are possibly one of the more idiotic people who posts on USENET. I am surprised you aren't a regular on sci.physics along with all the other semi-literate cranks. Do you have some theories of your own on the mass of a photon or two-way light speed or any of the other crankbait topics? Actually, I probably know the answer to that. You don't have any ideas of your own. |