Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: lucasea on 7 Oct 2006 22:32 > "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message > news:780gi25ruponn590krd8cgvvt9p3catitk(a)4ax.com... >> 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. Repetitive sycophant. Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 7 Oct 2006 22:36 "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message news:Y6GdnWmpKY3sibXYRVnyrw(a)pipex.net... > > "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message > news:1a0gi2909f3ana1bebl8q7e0qabhm2t2vs(a)4ax.com... > > > blah, blah blah > > I am sure it is, although "it is well known" is normally the last defence > of the crank who is talking nonsense. > > I am sure you can cite an example. What, of a crank talking nonsense? He has given examples of that in every post he's written. > You'd have thought you would have learned after such a life of stupidity. T Wake, please do think a little more before you write things like that. Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 7 Oct 2006 22:40 "John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote in message news:qm9gi297oamqd9flmtc4291edbfh6k9e2n(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 20:13:25 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >>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. > > --- > Really? > > Can you cite some examples or is that just some more of your > Ameriphobia? Bush. Rumsfeld. Need any more? Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 7 Oct 2006 22:51 "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message news:eg9fi9$ba4$3(a)blue.rahul.net... > > Even if the terrorists were Iraqis, the war has not selectively killed > them. It has killed Iraqis more or less at random. And some people still can't grok the fact that the Muslim world might be just a tad justified in being more than a little pissed off at this. It's too bad that several of the people who haven't caught on to that are those designing and implementing US foreign policy. Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 7 Oct 2006 22:55
"Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message news:eg9j8q$if6$1(a)blue.rahul.net... > > It isn't the fear that causes the problem it is cowardice. Courage isn't > the lack of fear. It is carrying on in the face of fear. Even a public > that is afraid of an imaginary threat can refuse to give up its rights. Yes, wouldn't *that* be nice for a change. Eric Lucas |