Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 13:14 "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:nf4fi251mtt9t5luo92tva6a7ftb222rkt(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 16:07:04 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> Gave us: > >> You are a living stereotype. > > > You are a living retard. There should be a law. There should be a law against you posting idiocy on USENET. There should be a law against people who cant structure a sentence properly. Either would get you locked up.
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 13:16 <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:6JQVg.14045$7I1.5221(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net... > > "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message > news:jt4fi2hpqhls5ujcahaasrq2jvcle25rhe(a)4ax.com... >> On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 21:59:40 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> Gave us: >> >>>Yep. And isn't it also ironic that the ouster of those very commies has >>>been one of the destabilizing forces in the world that may well have >>>furthered the current mess? >> >> >> You're an idiot. > > Ya gotta love his nuanced and repetitive view of the world, ladies and > gentlemen. He has made a lot of posts, he must be getting to the limit of words he can use. This explains the repeating cycles.
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 13:16 "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:jv4fi2dv8pn3rk9ii4b82fh6g89ikgcao2(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 10:05:23 +0100, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >> >>"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >>news:sludi21v218aau83uue1nhpk001333skb4(a)4ax.com... >>> On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 19:26:17 +0100, "T Wake" >>> <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >>> >>>>Sadly, you are a... >>> >>> Sadly, you are still no more than an idiot. >> >>IKYABWAI. >> >>Even being an idiot I am orders of magnitude above you. >> > Only on the idiot ranking board. Yeah, you aren't even very good as an idiot.
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 13:22 <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:GpOVg.9781$GR.2722(a)newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... > > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message > news:sPGdnWhqqOyW7LrYRVnyrw(a)pipex.net... >> >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message >> news:xfGVg.11941$6S3.9608(a)newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... >>> >>> "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message >>> news:eg72np$a4m$5(a)blue.rahul.net... >>>> In article <4525651A.5E36C356(a)hotmail.com>, >>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> So how many prisons will we need to build, and what fraction of the >>>>>> GDP will >>>>>> go into staffing/supporting/maintaining them, in order to imprison >>>>>> 100 >>>>>> million people? >>>>> >>>>>That would most likely sap the entire GDP of the USA. >>>> >>>> No, not since it doesn't have to happen. I only spoke of the fear of >>>> life >>>> in prison being a deterent. If a crime is detered, it doesn't happen >>>> and >>>> the jail isn't needed. >>> >>> >>> We've killed 200,000 Iraqis, and it hasn't deterred a damn thing. We're >>> going to have to imprison a helluva lot more than that, if we want to >>> convince anybody to do anything we want. So, now please go back and >>> answer the question. >> >> Doesn't that imply killing them is not a deterrent? > > No, it actually comes out and says it. Fair one :-) >> The problem is we are killing Iraqis and the terrorist are Syrians. If >> the Jihadists thought they would be jailed for life and have to suffer >> eighty years before they were martyred it would take a fair bit of steam >> out of their sails. (IMHO of course) > > I'm not any sort of expert on either terrorists or any of the ethnicities > in the Middle East, but I doubt that would make much of a difference. I > think the terrorist leadership is good at convincing their minions that > none of that matters. We'd have to imprison a hell of a lot of them in > order for it to sink in that they might have a reasonable chance of being > put in jail. In order for imprisonment to be any sort of deterrent, a > significant fraction of criminals must actually be imprisoned, in order > for the criminals to think they have any chance of being punished. > Something like half of murderers have to be put in jail...and yet murder > still happens. And I would argue that terrorists have a much stronger > impetus to commit terrorism, than other more run-of-the-mill murderers > have to commit murder. I seem to remember reading a Dutch study several years ago saying the main deterrent for criminals was the chance of arrest, not the severity of punishment (I tried to find it on Google now and couldn't so I may have made it up or got something crucially wrong). While, broadly, I agree with what you are saying there is an issue of *something* has to be done. While the good stuff of changing the environment the bombers come from etc., is going on the current crop of murderous c**ts has to be dealt with. They can be treated as enemy soldiers and killed (what is not working now), or they can be treated as criminal scum and punished.
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 13:35
"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:jm5fi25qgjsb3ocj4inrcvbd6vdnjkmloj(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 10:19:05 +0100, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >> >>"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >>news:h1vdi2t5quk2uvbtcogbq0nburnajq4356(a)4ax.com... >>> On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 20:09:43 +0100, "T Wake" >>> <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >>> >>>> >>>>"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >>>>news:pabbi21hj1om31j3avpn3mm32vdur9mo0n(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 13:22:17 -0400, Keith <krw(a)att.bizzzz> Gave us: >>>>> >>>>>>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. >>>>> >>>>> Good one. >>>> >>>>Sycophant. >>>> >>> Agreeing with someone does NOT make me a sycophant, you Usenet total >>> retard. >> >>No, it doesn't. There are lots of people here I agree with. Because you >>cant >>see the different, it makes you an idiotic sycophant. >> > You declaring that I can't see or know something has all the > markings of the oldest type of troll in Usenet. Yet you cant see the difference. If you could your response would be different. > They were wrong then, and you are wrong now, troll boy. IKWYABWAI |