Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 3 Oct 2006 11:27 lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > Ahmadinejad hasn't made the mistake of genocide like Saddam did, he's just > not very popular. How did he get elected then ? Graham
From: John Larkin on 3 Oct 2006 11:27 On Tue, 03 Oct 06 09:51:23 GMT, lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: >In article <jqhUg.45399$bf5.39370(a)edtnps90>, > "Homer J Simpson" <nobody(a)nowhere.com> wrote: >> >>"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >>news:hu33i2tqjfg6nfvg8d5o1krhaq0lr1umhi(a)4ax.com... >> >>> The issue is whether non-US-citizens have Constitutional rights when >>> they are not physically in the USA, or whether US citizens have such >>> rights when captured in a foreign country while fighting against our >>> military. >> >>The US believes that US law applies everywhere in the world, but US >>constitutional rights don't apply to anyone who isn't the 'right sort of >>person'. >> >> >> > >Tell me how many times the Bill of Rights says "people" and how many times it >says "citizens." It says "the people", not the more global "people." And it does recognize the concept of US citizenship. And in fact the constitution originally recognized that slaves did not have full rights of regular citizens, so there's plenty of precedent for allowing preferential rights to citizens. But US law certainly doesn't apply everywhere, and the US courts recognize that. It's self-appointed "International Courts" which claim global reach. John
From: Eeyore on 3 Oct 2006 11:28 John Larkin wrote: > On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:55:57 +0100, Eeyore wrote: > >John Larkin wrote: > >> On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 10:13:41 +0100, Eeyore wrote: > > >> >Your fixation with the history of WW2 is idiotic. > >> > >> Is ignorance better? > > > >It simply has zero relevance to the issue at hand. Mind you, just to put your fevered American minds >at rest, > should European Islam be stupid enough to get 'nasty' expect another 'Kristallnacht' with >Muslims being > progromised. > > I bet you're looking forward to that, boxcars and death camps. Does > "get nasty" include acquiring political power? If it ever came to it, I'd expect it would be the public reacting, not the politicians. Graham
From: John Larkin on 3 Oct 2006 11:29 On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 15:30:02 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > >> "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:452198F0.A71D16AC(a)hotmail.com... >> > >> > >> > John Fields wrote: >> > >> >> You miss no opportunity to lambaste the US, its population, its >> >> government, its institutions, and you hate its very existence, so >> >> what do you expect me to think, that you're a benevolent soul trying >> >> to help with constructive criticism? >> > >> > I thought it was fine under Clinton ! >> >> Yes, but you see, if he denigrates your point of view by labelling you as >> someone that could never say anything good about the US, then he doesn't >> have to take your point of view seriously and try to understand that perhaps >> it might even be a valid point of view, that an intelligent person may be >> capable of coming to through independent thought. It's the same thing the >> Bush administration does by labelling everyone that disagrees with it a >> "traitor" (under the *extremely* liberal interpretations that disagreeing >> with your government is tantamount to aiding the enemy.) What they seem to >> fail to understand is that the Constitution gives every US citizen is given >> the *responsibility* to question its government *every single* day of their >> lives. It really is sad that the Bush administration has seen fit to >> legitimize this sort of anti-American behavior. > >I saw Keith Olberman's broadcast on this issue. > >I find it truly fantastic that the US Gov't has become such a cesspool of >fuckwits and that so may of the US population are keen to lap it up. > >Graham It was some time ago that you stopped thinking and stopped discussing and began ranting. I sure hope you don't design electronics with a similar level of intellectual effort. John
From: John Fields on 3 Oct 2006 11:30
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 15:30:55 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >Gordon wrote: > >> On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 00:47:08 +0100, Eeyore wrote: >> >John Fields wrote: >> >> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 19:59:42 +0100, "T Wake" wrote: >> >> >"John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >> >> >> So what? With world domonation as its goal, one would expect it >> >> >> would strike world-wide, as the opportunity arose. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Whose goal? "It" isn't really appropriate to define the long term aims of a >> >> >disparate group of organisations. Are "they" trying to dominate the world or >> >> >destroy western society or convert every one or... >> >> >> >> --- >> >> "It" being radical Islam, the goal, in my opinion, would be to >> >> convert everyone to Islam and have them be subject to control by >> >> Muslim jurists, the goal being total world domination by Islam. >> >> >> >> Refusal to convert would result in death. >> > >> >Do you often conjure up such idiotic ideas out of thin air ? >> > >> >Graham >> > >> Graham, what John said is straight out of their Koran. Repeated >> in many Surah, Ayah passages. For example; >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Surah 47, Ayah 4 When ye encounter the infidels, strike of their >> heads till ye have made a great slaughter among them, and of the >> rest make fast the fetters. > >The Bible says contradictory things too. --- What's contradictory about: "If you don't convert we'll cut off your infidel head."? -- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer |