Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Nov 2006 08:44 In article <35729$454c971e$4fe7327$7959(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> In article <I7I2h.500$Mw.369(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:eifeh1$8qk_004(a)s820.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>> >>>>What counts with measuring the effectiveness of any social program >>>>is the individual stories, not the cut and dried percentages >>>>of service delivery counts. >>> >>>And yet you prefer to believe impersonal books when learning about what >>>Islam is all about, instead of talking to actual Muslims. >> >> >> What do you suggest? I'm reading about their history. Am I >> supposed to wait until I can talk to those who are long dead >> before I learn about the history of that area? Islam >> did not keep history records other than who studied under whom. >> >> >>>Your hypocrisy on >>>this issue suggests that you don't intrinsically prefer one or the other >>>(anecdotes or data), but rather in any given situation, you just pick and >>>choose what you believe by how well it supports your assumptions and >>>preconceived notions. Nice. >> >> >> It's an odd behaviour where the very people who suffer a mental >> aberrration claim that their opposites have the problem. > >Unfortunately it is common on usenet, not so much in >realtime FtF. Oh, no. This is not a usenet behaviour at all. Why do you think I'm participating? The Democrat leadership is doing the exact same thing and seems to be 100% successful at the redirection. I wish you would stop the namecalling bullshit. It's taking too long trying to find the cogent posts that I want to read. As a result, I'm missing important stuff. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Nov 2006 08:48 In article <pqmdnRwNx-agVtHYnZ2dnUVZ8qadnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > ><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >news:eii0o0$8ps_005(a)s792.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >> In article <I7I2h.500$Mw.369(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>> >>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>news:eifeh1$8qk_004(a)s820.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>> >>>> What counts with measuring the effectiveness of any social program >>>> is the individual stories, not the cut and dried percentages >>>> of service delivery counts. >>> >>>And yet you prefer to believe impersonal books when learning about what >>>Islam is all about, instead of talking to actual Muslims. >> >> What do you suggest? I'm reading about their history. > >Try doing both. I get the feeling you distance yourself from society >somewhat, which may explain the perspective you bring to the discussion. > >Try talking to, and spending time with, Moslems. They are not very different >from Christians. gODDAMMIT FUCKHEAd. I have done the talking and the visiting. The only thing I have not done is live in a country. > >> Am I >> supposed to wait until I can talk to those who are long dead >> before I learn about the history of that area? Islam >> did not keep history records other than who studied under whom. > >Really? Yes. Why don't you learn about the history. Think about it. If keeping images is not allowed, there will never be captions or reminders of who did what and when. The only reason we know about human history is what a culture left in its images. > >>> Your hypocrisy on >>>this issue suggests that you don't intrinsically prefer one or the other >>>(anecdotes or data), but rather in any given situation, you just pick and >>>choose what you believe by how well it supports your assumptions and >>>preconceived notions. Nice. >> >> It's an odd behaviour where the very people who suffer a mental >> aberrration claim that their opposites have the problem. > >It isn't very odd. The hard part is working out who is projecting and who >isn't. In this case, the task of figuring it out isn't difficult at all. I'm trying to figure out why it is working so well at the moment. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Nov 2006 08:52 In article <454C9AB3.BC6D0925(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >So you choose to listen to somebody who isn't even running for office, >> >> >> >> Kerry? He's running for President. >> > >> >Is he ? >> >> Yes. Time will tell if his latest slip of foot-in-mouth >> disease will affect his campaign. > >I wasn't aware that he had committed to run. He hasn't stopping running. Up until the last two months, the Democrat leadership were still making the 2004 campaign speeches. Why do you think I'm doing all this bitching about them? They are still in time capsule years of 2002 and 2003. > >Given his apparent lack of 'charisma' he might actually make a better >vice-presidential candidate perhaps ? Nobody runs for vice-president in the US. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Nov 2006 08:57 In article <oI83h.4315$9v5.3474(a)newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>, <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > >"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:454C9AB3.BC6D0925(a)hotmail.com... >> >> >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >So you choose to listen to somebody who isn't even running for >>> >> >office, >>> >> >>> >> Kerry? He's running for President. >>> > >>> >Is he ? >>> >>> Yes. Time will tell if his latest slip of foot-in-mouth >>> disease will affect his campaign. >> >> I wasn't aware that he had committed to run. > >He hasn't. Nobody can announce because of the legal money strings attached to announcements. In this state we know who is running for what based on where the person goes, what is said in the speeches (news reporters begin to use the word "very presidental" to describe the tone of a speech), and we also know how much money they have in their war chest. At the moment Kerry has $14million and won't share it with Democrats who are on the slate this election year. That's very big indication of what he's planning on doing. > She's using it as a strawman, so she can use any stupid thing he >says (and I guarantee there will be a lot--he's an idiot) to smear all other >members of his party. > > >> Given his apparent lack of 'charisma' he might actually make a better >> vice-presidential candidate perhaps ? > >No, he's unelectable. The Democrat leadership is still using the same tactics and plans that didn't elect Kerry. /BAH
From: Eeyore on 5 Nov 2006 09:02
jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >So all you're doing here is criticising the failings of your current > >> >system. Quite so. It needs radical overhaul. > >> > >> To go to a single payer system implies an expansion of the Medicare > >> system. So a national health insurer will not work well. > > > >The use of the word *so* implies some cause-effect relationship which you > >havefailed to show. I'm sorry but simple assertions based on political > doctrine > >count for nought. > > You are unbelievable. I'm getting to the point were I'm awestruck > by your ability to not-think. On the contrary. I'm asking you to state unambiguously what your case is. I don't intend to make guesses about it. > If a person botches a chore of > digging a ditch in your backyard, would you really hire him > to build a Panama Canal and expect it to work? No-one's botched anything wrt state supplied medicine as far as I can see. Others have already furnished data showing that US medicaid has a very low overhead for example. OTOH if you won't embrace the idea of universal health care then you've hardly got a great basis for comparison in the frist place have you ? > >> Congress even did something sensible and passed an extraordinary > >> insurance. The youngsteres who ran AARP caused their subscribers > >> to get it repealed. > > > >I know nothing about this. > > Then learn. People do not want to pay for insurance either, > especially if the insurance is prudent and make sense. It's not relevant to Europe. WEe're hardly likely to embrace a more expensive and discriminatory method of health care are we ? > >> >It's rare here to find a doctor who *doesn't* do NHS work. > >> > >> Is his license tied to volunteering? > > > >Licence ? You mean his qualification as a doctor. That's dealt with by the > >BMA ( British Medical Association ) as it always has been. > > > >Most doctors here simply work for the NHS since it's the largest health care > >employer in the land. There's no compulsion to do so and you can work in > >private practice to or even both, just like any other job. > > I smell union here. The BMA is not a memeber of the TUC AFAIK. Don't US doctors have a similar professional association ? Graham |