Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: John Larkin on 10 Oct 2006 11:32 On 10 Oct 2006 14:00:12 GMT, "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic(a)aon.at> wrote: >Michael A. Terrell wrote: > >> Its a good thing for England that the demented donkey doesn't >> believe North Korea's missiles and warheads are any threat. > > >Just to your troops, stationed up and down there. :-( >Nuclear seems the only way to get rid of their faint blackout, caused >by your permanent pressure there. Shame on you! > >For this North-Korea invasion you get a -5 from me! > > > So you approve of the North Korean government, and disapprove of the US defense of the South? What's your opinion of mass starvation? Approve or disapprove? John
From: T Wake on 10 Oct 2006 11:38 "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:452BB54D.24E6C679(a)earthlink.net... > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> In article <452B8438.3468BE7B(a)earthlink.net>, >> "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >> >> In article <kmnki2t5q21v3q4unpq99qqsner3pu6mhr(a)4ax.com>, >> >> John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> >On Mon, 09 Oct 06 10:36:40 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> > >> >> >>If your grocery store carries only one kind of apple, it >> >> >>doesn't matter how many other vareities you want if it >> >> >>is the only store carrying apples. The only way you can >> >> >>get him to carry the variety you want is to convince him. >> >> >>This is called changing his mindset. Until you do that, >> >> >>there is no other option available to you for getting >> >> >>the apple you want. >> >> > >> >> >Just go to another store! That's what I do. >> >> >> >> There aren't any other stores. There won't be any other >> >> stores. You are assuming that capitalism, a.k.a. >> >> competition, is allowed. >> >> >> >> /BAH >> > >> > >> > I would do the same thing I do right now. If I can't find what I >> >want, I don't buy anything. I walk out of a lot of stores, empty handed >> >because what I came for wasn't in stock. As far as apples go, I haven't >> >seen one fit to eat in four months, so its been that long since I've had >> >one. >> >> Yea, I know. There was something weird about the apple market >> this year. Macs just got stocked two weeks ago. >> >> > A dollar a pound for apples the size of a large chicken egg? >> >Forget it! There isn't enough to take two good bites, so someone else >> >can buy them. >> >> My tree produced apples the size of crabapples this year. There >> was something odd about this year's apple crop. Tomatoes seemed >> to stay unusually small but we haven't figured out if it's the >> seed or the season; have to wait until next year to test that. >> >> Now, what if the item you want to acquire is a continuation of your >> life style? The only store won't allow it and destroys anything >> that has the taint of that life style? >> >> Now what do you do? >> >> /BAH > > > Destroy my lifestyle? That's almost funny. I live a very simple > life since I am 100% disabled. My "Lifestyle" is one of basic survival. > I don't want fancy foods (That I can't eat anyway), I don't want > expensive booze, because I don't drink. My truck is 19 years old, My TV > is seven years old, and this computer was assembled from a half dozen > junkers. If the stores drop what I "NEED", they will be closing their > doors for good, anyway. I have lived most of my life with the attitude > that if I couldn't fix it, i didn't need it, If I didn't have cash, I > didn't buy it. I've NEVER had a credit card, and I don't want any. > > Do you have another house of cards waiting to fall? > For once, and perhaps worryingly, I find myself agreeing with your sentiments here.
From: T Wake on 10 Oct 2006 11:41 "Frithiof Andreas Jensen" <frithiof.jensen(a)die_spammer_die.ericsson.com> wrote in message news:egg38a$r3o$1(a)news.al.sw.ericsson.se... > > "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in > message > news:b5qki29j7v7jkck7lj1d6n54dp8u9r03ms(a)4ax.com... >> On Mon, 9 Oct 2006 11:09:53 +0200, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen" >> <frithiof.jensen(a)die_spammer_die.ericsson.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in >> >message >> >news:iq1ji2t66ov05f69i8oamaop8nq107jigb(a)4ax.com... >> >> On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 20:29:08 GMT, Jan Panteltje >> >> <pNaonStpealmtje(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >Veil seeking missiles serve 2 things: >> >> >1) The fear for them will keep the veils away and preserve our >> >> >society. >> >> >2) It will keep the veils away and preserve our society. >> >> > >> >> >> >> Do you really think that women wearing veils is a threat to your >> >> society? How fragile that sounds. >> > >> >In much the same way that skinheads wearing "hagen-kreutz" are - the >> >wearers >> >boldly avertise that they are outsiders that want a different society >> >where > the >> >outsider-norms are the rule. >> > >> >> Scairy, aren't they, people who have different opinions and haircuts >> from yours. > > "Different" --- I think that "Alien" is more correct! > > Stirring the interest factor, we have for example Mona Sheikh, Tariq > Ramadan, > Abu Laban constantly lecturing us barbarians on the value of adopting > stoning > and beheading through sharia law - when "they" become "many enough". If they become many through a legitimate democratic process, I cant what the alternative is. We have non-Muslims advocating the death penalty. If they become many through something other than a legitimate democratic process, I can't see how it would work. Open, legitimate, democracies are a very resilient form of government.
From: Lloyd Parker on 10 Oct 2006 07:54 In article <452A8401.BA13C0FF(a)earthlink.net>, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >Lloyd Parker wrote: >> >> It was in a commercial flight path. And the pilot had no way of knowing the >> ship was calling HIS plane. > > > So, what plane did the pilot think they were calling? > > They were calling on frequencies the pilot probably wasn't even monitoring.
From: lucasea on 10 Oct 2006 12:12
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:452B24D6.7B8C3149(a)earthlink.net... > John Larkin wrote: >> >> On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:50:52 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell" >> <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> >> >John Larkin wrote: >> >> >> >> I studied the Jefferson-Hamilton debate in school, as most of us have, >> >> and I'm not ignorant of it. Amendment 4, >> >> >> >> "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, >> >> papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall >> >> not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, >> >> supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the >> >> place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." >> >> >> >> doesn't address whether the people have a right to privacy when >> >> engaged in public affairs, or when using a NASA-launched satellite to >> >> send messages to another country. Censorship of international >> >> correspondence in time of war would not have shocked the Founders. >> >> >> >> Your insertion of phrases like "of which you appear ignorant" is >> >> silly. And I don't care what you consider to be "excusable" because >> >> you have no means of enforcing your rules. So you might stick to >> >> trying to make sense. >> > >> > >> > Soldiers letters home were censored during WW II, I have seen >> >pictures of letters with words or sentences cut out. I have a DVD with >> >some WW II training films, including one about "Loose Lips Sink Ships", >> >telling the military what they could, and could not write home about in >> >any war related effort. >> >> There's always a compromise between liberty and safety. That's why we >> have traffic lights. > > > Yes, not to mention idiots on motorcycles who blow through red lights > without slowing down. Darwin at work. Stupidity *should* be lethal. Eric Lucas |