Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 14 Oct 2006 17:28 "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:b9l2j2lrl75bpn74p86hf5670qmtuqjkla(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:07:34 +0100, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >>You don't understand what COMSEC is. You don't understand how it fits into >>the security picture. It is "current" in some circles but, trust me, it is >>depreciated. > > You're an idiot. Seriously, compared to you I am a genius. > Also, the word you may have been attempting to use > is deprecated, not depreciated. Ok, you caught a typo. Well done. Remember your response when I commented on your typo? Are you a hypocrite as well as a sycophant? > Still, either choice is incorrect as neither fits the reality. Oh yes it does.
From: T Wake on 14 Oct 2006 17:30 "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:kjl2j25upr3vs4487sv2rsmdfl8bnfg99i(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:20:22 +0100, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >> >>"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >>news:fvk2j2tcv9hg3ijf03nkh9u72f5kqf31uv(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 21:56:03 +0100, "T Wake" >>> <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >>> >>>>This is USENET - it is an open discourse. >>> >>> >>> He said... right after he posted "I don't care enough about you to >>> bother..." >> >>Your comprehension issue remains. Cutting out the context does not support >>your claims. >> >>I said I didnt care about you enough to bother searching for your >>examples. >> >>> Which is it, T Weak? >>> >>> I don't care about you... AT ALL! See how that works? >> >>Obviously you don't. You can type it in any case you want. What is your >>point? >> > Seems like you are the one that has an obsession with case. I might well have. Still, what is your point? Are you incapable of answering direct questions? Are you waiting for some one with more brains to join in so you can agree with them?
From: JoeBloe on 14 Oct 2006 17:31 On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:23:30 +0100, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >> ala Mother Theresa? > >Do you think her flesh has not decayed? I'm sure it has by now, but apparently you do not recall the news after her death. Now, I suppose you would deny that ever took place as well.
From: T Wake on 14 Oct 2006 17:35 "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:vfl2j2545iv3b0upvehghjdjjac8a0a35u(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:07:34 +0100, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >> >>Have you found out what organisation provides COMSEC advice to the British >>Government yet? > > > You're an idiot. You stated in an earlier post that it is not > hardware related then point to a post which speaks about TEMPEST, and > you have no clue as to the fact that that is 100% hardware related! Here we go, another collection of strawmen created to mask your chronic lack of understanding. COMSEC is not _limited_ to hardware. As I said in the previous post it is a concept not tied to a specific piece of equipment (despite _your_ claims to the contrary). TEMPEST _is_ related to certain pieces of equipment but is only the term which discusses the possible threats from propagation. COMSEC is still not 100% hardware related. Despite your apparent jubilation, even _you_ admitted it covered conversation. Which bit of Hardware do you think that involves? COMSEC also, critically doesn't think of the threat to the information while it is stored. This is why COMSEC is a subset of larger security issues. You really do have no clue. I really, really, wish you would work for some of the companies that go into tender against mine. It would make life so much easier.
From: T Wake on 14 Oct 2006 17:35
"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:mnl2j2la4v548cee3pi2olfsh60n1hlrda(a)4ax.com... > On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:23:30 +0100, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >>> ala Mother Theresa? >> >>Do you think her flesh has not decayed? > > > I'm sure it has by now, but apparently you do not recall the news > after her death. Now, I suppose you would deny that ever took place > as well. Wow. You really do exist in a dream world. |