New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 6 Aug 2006 20:31 John Woodgate wrote: > In message <44D63C58.CBBA6896(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com>, dated Sun, 6 Aug > 2006, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> writes > >Jim Yanik wrote: > > > >> Saddam was using Oil-for-Food money to rebuild his palaces and fund WMD > >> programs > > > >There weren't any WMDs ! > > No. A big surprise, isn't it? Everything pointed to SH's advantage being > very much in continuing his previous WMD programme, which certainly did > exist. Indeed. It seems the 'science' existed but not the hardware. > It's a much bigger mystery that nothing was found than that the > Coalition intelligence was totally wrong. Which side of your mouth is your tongue in ? ;~) Being anxious to believe Iraqi 'dissidents' with an axe to grind might have played a part in that ! Of course UK intelligence knew the most of the truth but it was politically inconvenient to let the truth be known. Graham
From: Eeyore on 6 Aug 2006 20:33 John Fields wrote: > On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 16:29:20 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: > > >John Fields wrote: > > >> --- > >> Never mind; I'm waiting for an answer. > > > >That's easy. Of course I don't want them to be defeated. I'd like to see them > >live in peace with their neighbours and I fear that their current actions are > >more likely to adversely affect that possibility. > > --- > So, you think that they should be infinite sinks? I don't understand what you mean by that and I think it's unwise to guess. Graham
From: Eeyore on 6 Aug 2006 20:35 John Woodgate wrote: > In message <glfcd2tvk21bpuakqrfeho51o2r8elfgd5(a)4ax.com>, dated Sun, 6 > Aug 2006, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> > writes > > >In California, the squeeze results from increasing population combined > >with putting a lot of land off-limits to development. You don't have a > >lot of surplus land in Britain, either, I guess. > > Like in CA, a lot of it is protected from development. In the district I > live in, 98% is, but that is exceptional. > > >Housing is a fraction of our local pricing in, say, Texas or Florida. > > House prices are much lower in the frozen north of Britain, because > no-one wants to live there. (;-) 'Global warming' (tm) may fix that ! ;~) Graham
From: Eeyore on 6 Aug 2006 20:37 Jim Yanik wrote: > John Woodgate <jmw(a)jmwa.demon.co.uk> wrote in > news:UIZDeWgKGj1EFww$@jmwa.demon.co.uk: > > > In message <92acd2ti8n9opnthr1fd7d3imis3ah08vt(a)4ax.com>, dated Sun, 6 > > Aug 2006, Phat Bytestard <phatbytestard(a)getinmahharddrive.org> writes > > > >>Iran is trying to make nukes. Not for protection of their nation, but > >>so they can USE them. > > Nuclear WEAPONS,not power plants;they really don't need nuclear power > generating plants. I find it curious how 'Washington' feels it's its business to dictate what power sources another country should use. By the same token, the USA should shut down all its own reactors. Graham
From: Eeyore on 6 Aug 2006 20:38
joseph2k wrote: > Eeyore wrote: > > > > Don Bowey wrote: > > > >> Also, you should not put a space at the end of a sentence ahead of the > >> punctuation. > > > > You don't like this ? Tough ! I do it for readability. > > > > Graham > > With the result of reducing it. That's ok, go your own way. Disrupt > accustomed visual parsing all you want. The "Next" button is easy to find. It looks better to me. I'm happy with it. Only a pedant would criticise it. Graham |