New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: Phat Bytestard on 8 Aug 2006 22:07 On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:21:30 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> Gave us: > As did the USA with their Norden bombsight that didn't actually >deliver the goods in practice. That would be Norton. We fire bombed Dresden for the UK. We didn't need no stinkin' bombsights. It was at night, and we dropped a huge salvo. No aim required. One of the worst things we ever did. At least we admit it.
From: Ken Smith on 8 Aug 2006 22:10 In article <cv6gd21nc6vg16e5jb55bgeo0ls51dp6v1(a)4ax.com>, Phat Bytestard <phatbytestard(a)getinmahharddrive.org> wrote: >On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 02:17:03 +0000 (UTC), kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken >Smith) Gave us: > >>Take a look at it. It is a funny shape. > > > It is not a funny shape. Your brain has a funny shape. You seem to still think that you can gain something by insulting. It isn't working. To the contrary, it is making people tune out and losing you support. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge
From: Phat Bytestard on 8 Aug 2006 22:22 On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 06:48:13 -0500, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> Gave us: >On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 19:36:59 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax ><dirk.bruere(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>John Fields wrote: > >>> --- >>> Well, then, you support Israel's right to defend herself under her >>> own laws and in her own way? >> >>No. >>The right of self defence has to be limited in a civilised society. If >>somebody slaps me I have no right to burn their house down with them and >>their family inside. >>The law recognises 'proportionate response'. > >--- >OK, let's say, in one case, that I slap you for no reason other than >that I hate you. What would you suggest as an appropriate response? >A return slap of equal amplitude and duration or a blow of >sufficient power to make me never want to slap you again? > >In the second case, let's say that I slap you with the intent of >getting slapped back, but my eventual plan is to kill you after you >slap me back, and for justification I'll call your slap back a >disproportionate response. > >An appropriate response, in my view, would be for you to so severely >incapacitate me after I slapped you the first time that it would be >impossible for me to continue. > >In other words, I had no business slapping you in the first place, >so you should make it your business to make sure that I can never >slap you again. > >Do you have a problem with that? > Perfect analogy.
From: Phat Bytestard on 8 Aug 2006 22:27 On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 14:26:59 +0200, "Frank Bemelman" <f.bemelmanq(a)xs4all.invalid.nl> Gave us: >IMO, it's an offensive action, using a 3rd party. >Indirect provocation or something. "or something"? Could you be any more retarded?
From: Ken Smith on 8 Aug 2006 22:30
In article <8ggid21656bid8qra3dmdqvttfvv8bsmvt(a)4ax.com>, Phat Bytestard <phatbytestard(a)getinmahharddrive.org> wrote: [... OBL ...] > We are trying to find and kill him every day. We want to stop him >spreading too. A reference: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/05/terror/main1776250.shtml As spoken by teh President: [Bush]: "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." The guy is a foot taller than everyone else in the room and somehow they can't find him. There are good reasons why the admin may not want to find him. For one thing his family may be upset by what happens after he is found. -- -- kensmith(a)rahul.net forging knowledge |