Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 7 Oct 2006 14:59 <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:eg7ujb$8qk_010(a)s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > In article <sPGdnWtqqOyR7LrYRVnyrw(a)pipex.net>, > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: >> >><lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message >>news:sfGVg.11940$6S3.1257(a)newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... >>> >>> "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message >>> news:eg72kt$a4m$4(a)blue.rahul.net... >>> >>>> When you go to war against a country, you >>>> bomb its capital regardless of how large of a land mass the country >>>> covers. >>> >>> That would be great, but the terrorists aren't a country, and there is >>> no >>> capital. >> >>This is (IMHO) the oddest thing about the jingoism over the "war on >>terror." >>People keep talking about bombing and invading, yet the list of countries >>which would have to be bombed / invaded is ludicrous. > > I had 12 countries on my list. How many people will die in the bombing? > Somalia is apparently starting > to deal with its problems on its own, now that the Cold War > is out of their back yard. Not in anything like a nice way. > Libya is acting a bit better. > I've heard rumors that Saudi Arabia is beginning a little bit. > I don't get much information from the fUSSR sections. Yet, none of this change really required invasions and bombings.
From: Eeyore on 7 Oct 2006 15:13 lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > I give up--I was wrong. You weren't sincere when you said you examine your > assumptions. You don't even admit what assumptions you make, and what > political filter you put information through. You're no worse than the > other knee-jerk reactionaries on either side of this thread. If you are the > future of the political process in this country, we are in real trouble. > > Just a hint, though...you might want to try having conversations with actual > mainstream Middle Eastern Muslims, rather than reading some right-wing > claptrap written to justify the US's current bad behavior and applying it to > all of Muslim society. The problem is that the above kind of thought is now being branded as traitorous in the USA. Graham
From: Daniel Mandic on 7 Oct 2006 15:29 T Wake wrote: > Still, it is amazing how well he managed to get rid of the evidence > come the invasion. If only he had used that skill for the UN > inspectors the war would never have happened. Yes. And a slighter tread, in the time of invasion. Attack is Attack, let's say it is so, but the actions taken contradict any American thinking. With cannons on sparrows! Best regards, Daniel Mandic
From: JoeBloe on 7 Oct 2006 15:32 On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 17:05:44 GMT, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> Gave us: >I give up--I was wrong. Top posting Usenet RETARD! Bone up on the forums you invade!
From: JoeBloe on 7 Oct 2006 15:34
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 18:13:31 +0100, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >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. I say again. You *know* nothing. You certainly know no such thing as any of the things which you have said about me. |