Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 15 Oct 2006 20:23 John Fields wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >John Fields wrote: > >> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> >"John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote in message > >> > >> >> You guys? > >> >> > >> >> You'd tremble at the prospect of it unless you had the US to back > >> >> you up, and you have the temerity to believe that we'd defend you if > >> >> you were wrong? > >> > > >> >Really? Is this an unspported assertion in order that you may score some > >> >points against Eeyore? > >> > > >> >I can certainly think of occasions where the UK has _not_ had US back up in > >> >military operations. That said, our military is about 1/10th the size of the > >> >US military so expecting the same is a fallacy all on its own. > >> > >> --- > >> Missed this the first time around, sorry... > >> > >> The fact is that the UK _always_ has US backup in any of her > >> military (ad)ventures, should she need it. Tacit, and she knows it. > > > >Always ? > > --- > AFAIK. Can you cite an example where you asked for help and we > denied you? You said backup. The USA didn't back us up over Suez. Graham
From: Eeyore on 15 Oct 2006 20:32 JoeBloe wrote: > I would also point to the day Saddam's statue was felled. Or do you > think all those Iraqis cheering were paid for? They were cheering the fall of Saddam not the US troops. Graham
From: Eeyore on 15 Oct 2006 20:33 JoeBloe wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: > >JoeBloe wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: > >> >JoeBloe wrote: > >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> Gave us: > >> >> > >> >> >It rewrites existing telephone harassment law to prohibit anyone from using the > >> >> >Internet "without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy." > >> >> > >> >> My intent is not to annoy. If you get annoyed, that's your problem. > >> > > >> >It's now your problem sunshine. > >> > > >> >You can fix that ( the federal offence ) by posting using your real name btw. > >> > > >> I do not have a problem, dipshit. > >> > >> Over here "offence" is not a word. That is aside from the fact that > >> no such violation has taken place. > > > >Maybe. Maybe not. > > > >You're in violation of your ISP's AUP though. > > You are one fucked up little cry baby. You're in violation of your ISP's AUP. Graham
From: hill on 15 Oct 2006 20:35 science_for_jihad(a)yahoo.com wrote: > Jihad needs competent scientists in the fields of nuclear physics, > chemistry and biology. Qualified scientists and engineers at the > Master/Ph.D. level and above are encouraged to apply. Readiness > to travel and to pass a preliminary examination is required. > > Anyone interested should send his anonymous CV to the address > science_for_jihad(a)yahoo.com . The CV should contain information > reflecting the academic level reached by the candidate and his work > experience. The information however should not be so accurate as to > identify the candidate. An appropriately fantasious nickname and a > birth date corresponding to the approximate age of the candidate > should also be provided, together with a working email address. > Further instructions will follow. 4200 postings and still going strong. Amazing. BTW, did the further instructions follow?
From: Eeyore on 15 Oct 2006 20:37
JoeBloe wrote: > Problem is, my ISP is more interested in my monthly remittance than > they are in some lame US hating Brit twit's factless bullshit claims. > > They MIGHT send me an e-mail reminding me to review the TOS. They *would*. > They also know that freedom of speech carries a lot of weight in > this land, and that they could end up on the wrong end of a huge, > costly suit. Your much-vaunted 'freedom of speech' doesn't include freedom to threaten or abuse. Graham |