Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 08:07 On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:20:03 +0100, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >> Why make such a big fuss over it ? > >Because JoeBloe reads too many Tom Clancy novels. > You're an idiot. I already told you I don't read fiction OR "novels" for that matter. I work in the real world. You and the DonkTARD, on the other hand...
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 08:11 On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:32:57 +0100, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >> Not true. > >Very true. In the UK it is more commonly called INFOSEC, which is another >American term. Wrong again. It is the same reference among ALL US allies that utilize US gear, and they ALL do. That is what the word "joint" means, dumbass. Get a clue, you know nothing twit.
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 08:13 On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:32:57 +0100, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >but as I am sure you >are aware COMSEC is not about computers and networks. Wrong again, idiot. ANY time data is exchanged, and it passes electronically, it is communicated. It encompasses data voice video, et al. Try again, guess boy! Gaineth Thyself A Clue
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 08:14 On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:32:57 +0100, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >You can doubt. It is still true. The term was in use in the British Military >until a few years ago, when they did have a COMSEC Monitoring Team. But it >no longer exists and the terminology has evolved. > >Please, try to keep up. You ain't real bright, boy!
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 08:16
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:32:57 +0100, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >Your fixation on COMSEC is interesting, given that you think I am an ITSy >practitioner am I right in thinking you think COMSEC is Computer Security? >In reality it deals more with the use of telephones (especially mobiles), >relays and "loose lips." Wrong again, dipshit! |