New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 6 Aug 2006 20:13 Phat Bytestard wrote: > You are quite a sad excuse for an intelligent being... really. At least he *is* intelligent, unlike yourself. Graham
From: Eeyore on 6 Aug 2006 20:14 John Fields wrote: > On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 16:14:10 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >John Fields wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 22:15:49 +0100, Eeyore > >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> >John Fields wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 01:28:08 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax > >> >> <dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >Except, of course, that Britain stood alone when it mattered and the US > >> >> >did not. > >> >> > >> >> --- > >> >> "When it mattered?" Don't be absurd. As far as you know we got > >> >> there just in time. > >> > > >> >I guess he might be referring to the Battle of Britain ? > >> > >> Maybe, but he'd be wrong since we _were_ there. Only a few of us, > >> but... > > > >These were Americans fighting on our side simply because they believed in the > >cause of course not on account of US policy. > > > > > >> From: > >> > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain#United_States_contribution > >> > >> "The RAF recognises 7 aircrew personnel from the United States as > >> having taken part in the Battle of Britain.P/O WML ('Billy') Fiske > >> saw service with No. 601 Squadron, claiming one kill before dying of > >> wounds on the 17th August 1940. P/O AG 'Art' Donahue served with 64 > >> squadron, while 609 squadron had a trio of American pilots see > >> action through August and September (P/O's 'Andy' Mamedoff, VC > >> 'Shorty' Keogh and EQ 'Red' Tobin). P/O PH Leckrone was with 616 > >> Sqn, while P/O JD Haviland served in 151 Squadron. Only the latter > >> pilot survived the war. Ultimately three squadrons of RAF pilots > >> from the United States, known as Eagle squadrons fought with the > >> RAF, although the first ( No. 71 squadron) became operational in > >> February 1941, well after the main daylight battles." > >> --- > > > >I had thought it was around four Americans from memory alone but I'm happy to be > >corrected on this point. > > > >The full list is..... > > > >Polish 139 > >New Zealander 98 > >Canadian 86 > >Czechoslovakian 84 > >Belgian 29 > >Australian 21 > >South African 20 > >French 13 > >Irish 10 > >Unknown 8 > >American 7 > >Jamaican 1 > >Palestinian (Jewish) 1 > >Southern Rhodesian 1 > > > > > >> >Had Britain fallen there > >> >wouldn't even have been a party to come to, never mind arrive late. > >> > >> --- > >> But she didn't, so the point is moot. > > > >Indeed. But there was no American aid involved. > > --- > Idiot, read the list you posted. What kind of 'aid' do you call that ? I said above that it was nothing to do with US foreign policy. Graham
From: Eeyore on 6 Aug 2006 20:16 Phat Bytestard wrote: > On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 20:15:26 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> Gave us: > > >"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > > > >> Eeyore wrote: > >> > > >> > Phat Bytestard wrote: > >> > > >> > > Yep... even the media that the "money" got printed on came from > >> > > trees. > >> > > >> > Rag has been traditionally used actually ! You can't get much right can you ? > >> > > >> > Graham > >> > >> YOU don't know much about paper. > >> > >> As far as paper for money, some of it has synthetic fibers added to > >> make them last longer, and to be harder to tear. > > > >And what was used before synthetic fibres ? > > > >Are you suggesting the paper made from rag *isn't* in use even now ? > > Rag is PLANT FIBER, dumbass. The plants in question *are NOT trees*, dumbass. Graham
From: Eeyore on 6 Aug 2006 20:17 John Fields wrote: > On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 16:27:31 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >John Fields wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 23:38:00 -0300, YD <ydtechHAT(a)techie.com> wrote: > >> > >> >On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:59:03 -0500, John Fields > >> ><jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: > >> > >> >>What I find incongruous is that so many of you all (Europeans, I > >> >>guess.) would rather turn a blind eye toward the middle east and let > >> >>Israel die than to help her. Why is that? > >> >> > >> > > >> >Possibly because in the long view Israel is rather insignificant, > >> >except as a regional US puppy. What have they contributed to world > >> >wealth and wisdom? > >> > >> --- > >> Israel, lately, > >> > >> http://www.newsoftheday.com/ > > > >" Israelis invent hydrogen car that uses just a tank of water." ( first item on > >the page ) > >http://www.newscientisttech.com/channel/tech/mg19125621.200.html > > > >Neither new ( i.e. not an invention at all ) nor terribly useful. > > > >Just saying. > > --- > Read the rest of the list. > > Sour grapes? Not at all. I'm unimpressed by so-called 'inventions' that are no such thing though. Graham
From: Phat Bytestard on 6 Aug 2006 20:23
On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 01:10:41 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> Gave us: > >John Fields wrote: > >> On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 16:06:56 +0100, Eeyore >> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >John Woodgate wrote: >> > >> >> In message <1154865648.931183.173690(a)i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, >> >> dated Sun, 6 Aug 2006, bill.sloman(a)ieee.org writes >> >> >> >> >As was pointed out before you invaded Irak, the three-way division of >> >> >Irak into Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites makes it impossible to construct a >> >> >stable government. >> >> >> >> The *government* was reasonably stable before Saddam, and, of course, >> >> during his reign of oppression and genocide. Various sectors of the >> >> population experienced bad things; such was the price of 'stability'. >> > >> >Overall it seems that the price under Saddam was less than the price under the >> >coalition. >> >> --- >> I think the cost in innocent Human lives under Saddam Hussein was >> greater than the cost after his deposition. > >It depends entirely how you choose to do the accounting. Right. Saddam torturing and murdering hundreds and then burying them in one of hundreds of mass graves he created. Sure, bub. |