Jihad needs scientists

[Eeyore]

Jim Thompson wrote:

Sheeesh! Do a Google-groups search on Eeyore/Graham... he's a
depraved poster to porn groups, so he's probably in a cell, posting
from the prison library ;-)

Idiot as ever Jim.

Close the door after you will you like a good little redneck.

Graham

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:00:32 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 08:47:23 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 02:33:19 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:

The US is not demonizing Islam, at this point. It makes the
distinction between Islam and Islamic extremism.

I can assure you that many Americans don't understand the difference.

How many is "many"? Seven? If "many" means "a significant fraction",
then you are, as usual, inventing anti-American "facts."

The majority who post on Usenet for sure !

It seems to me that the US War on Terror has simply created a new kind of
hostile racism or culture'ism of a sort.

Graham

I read about a recent experiment that was done in the UK. In response
to advertised job openings, good but fake resumes were invented and
sent in, with the only difference that some had English-sounding names
and some had Muslim-sounding names. The response ratio was about 5:1.

I suspect this is another urban myth actually. A similar thing was *really*
done with different ages in fact.

It's in here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Muslim#Islamophobia_in_Europe

John

 

[Eeyore]

T Wake wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
T Wake wrote:
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message

I'll say again, it is a war, refusing to recognize it as such will not
make it go away.

I disagree. It is not a war. This is not a case of "refusing to recognise
it as such." Wars are wars. Soldiers are notoriously bad at fighting
terrorism.
Terrorists are criminals.

Indeed. And no War on Crime has ever been won.

Heading down the road of philosophical arguments now, but would it be
possible to "win" a war on crime? Like all the "War on ..." sound bites, how
can they ever be won?

They never can of course. So the USA has set itself up for yet another failed
war. In fact it currently seems to be having precisely the reverse effect of
that intended. Of course, as long as the USA feels safe it reckons it's winning.
Idiots !

Graham

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:06:00 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

How much do you personally donate to things like this?

I don't have to account for it thank you and I certainly don't have the kind of income
that would allow me to donate anything like you do. We do however have a government
that does it on our behalf, not to mention the likes of Oxfam etc... in the 'voluntary
sector' who are normally very fast off the mark when need is high.

Graham

In other words, nothing. In Texas, people like you are called "all hat
and no horse."

John

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 08:37:41 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 07:52:41 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 14:17:53 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

The United States is the world's largest contributor of ODA in absolute terms
($15.7 billion, 2003), but the *SMALLEST* among developed countries as a
percentage of its GDP (0.14% in 2003). The UN target for development aid is 0.7%
of GDP; currently only five countries (with Norway in the lead with 0.92%) achieve
this." ( my emphasis )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aid


Graham





http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp


See "side notes on private contributions." Personally, both my wife
and I donate many thousands of dollars to the foreign-aid institutions
we believe in. This year, I will give maybe $20,000 to Doctors Without
Borders.

How much do you personally donate to things like this?

John

Sheeesh! Do a Google-groups search on Eeyore/Graham... he's a
depraved poster to porn groups, so he's probably in a cell, posting
from the prison library ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Really? What sort of smut does he specialize in? Probably the
non-procreative British kind.

John

 

[T Wake]

<mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message
news:XxYTg.5$45.149@news.uchicago.edu...

In article <lqCdnZd8Rd3mzL3YRVnysA@pipex.net>, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> writes:

Really? So all the "Rules of War" apply then?

The rules of war apply to those who themselves apply the rules of war.

That is a cop out.

No, it is not.

It is, but it digresses.

Declaring "War on Terror" was an interesting soundbite and has generated
lots of publicity for the campaign to reduce the threat of international
Islamic-inspired terrorism.

Reading from the manual?

It has been a few years since I would have had any access to manuals of this
nature. Sadly.

However, it has some major drawbacks. Mainly, it is not a "war" that can
ever be won. Ever.

I wouldn't say that much but it may take a very long time to win it.
On the other hand, it is a war which can be lost.

The victory conditions are either nonsensical or nonachievable. Has any "War
on Terror" been won?

Historically, terrorism finds its early footing when people "feel" oppressed
and have no reasonable method to gain self representation. This feeling
(primarly from the Middle East against other Middle Eastern governments) has
been pounced upon by people who have more to gain from conflict. Eventually
the Bad People have managed to get the oppressed people to refocus on the US
as the great Satan.

You could kill all the bad people, but as long as people felt oppressed
there would still be the sparks of Terrorism (Freedom Fighters). As more and
more rights get taken away at home to fight the Invisible Enemy (Its all for
the War Effort so it is Unpatriotic to complain), more people at home feel
oppressed. The circle never ends.

Terrorist / Freedom Fighters have been in existence for all of recorded
history. Does it seem realistic that it can ever be "beaten."

A "War on Islamic Extremist Inspired Terrorism" may have victory conditions,
but publicising such a war would certainly provide succor and support to the
enemy.

Refusing to recognize it as such will not make it go
away.

Calling it a war legitimizes the terrorists and stops people thinking of
them as criminals who should be punished. For thirty years the British
were
terrorized by Irish Republicans, it was never called a "war."

I'll say again, it is a war, refusing to recognize it as such will not
make it go away.

I disagree.

I know you disagree, but I couldn't care less.

Obviously. If you dont care, dont reply. If you care enough to reply dont be
rude.

It is not a war. This is not a case of "refusing to recognise it
as such." Wars are wars. Soldiers are notoriously bad at fighting
terrorism.
Terrorists are criminals.

Criminals are people who are motivated by self interest and can be
deterred by sufficiently reducing the chance of profit. And, they're
parasites on the society, not trying to destroy it, just milk it. The
Islamic terrorists aim at destruction of the western society and
you're not going to deter them because there is no deterring people
who already decided that they don't care whether they live or die.
For the same reason, the concepts of "punishment" and "bringing to
justice" are plain silly in this context.

Reasonable argument there and it certainly is with merit, although it does
also lean away from calling it a war. Very few soldiers go into battle not
caring if they live or die.

When it comes to terrorism, the suicide bombers are often exactly as you
describe. Most of the time, the facilitators, funders and the like are far
from this motivated. Even amongst Islamic extremists very few are so
hardened they are willing to die. In Iraq most attacks are stand off
(rockets etc) or use RCIEDs. If all the extremists were about to visit Allah
then there would be much, much more suicide bombings.

The west is caught between treating the terrorists as criminals on the one
hand and soldiers on the other. If they are criminals then the vastly more
experienced justice system can disrupt their operations. If they are
soldiers then invade the local Mosques, by definition they are providing
support and succor to the enemy.

The crux is how much you are prepared to destroy western society in order
that you protect it.

When fighting a "war" there are methods and tactics that are different to
fighting terrorism. You combat terrorists with intelligence-led police
work.
You fight wars with tanks.

You fight wars with all sorts of means (including intelligence), depending
on the situation. Intelligence is important but if you'll rely on
this alone, you're going to lose.

The basic unit of warfighting is a combat infantryman fire team.

These are soldiers trained to kill. This in no way denigrates US / UK
soldiers, who are currently engaged in levels of combat unparelled for
decades. There is a reason why we dont have soldiers on the streets in the
west.

The problem is soldiers are soldiers. They fight. They are told who on their
side and can kill every one else. Terrorist are often indistinguishable from
the local population. This results in soldiers sometimes killing innocent
people. From this, the obviously distraught families feel the invaders are a
"bad thing" and the local terrorist cell gets a few new recruits who want to
"get their own back" (in the same manner that so many westerner want to
"bomb them back to the stone age").

In the early seventies it became very apparent that using Soldiers to police
the streets in Northern Ireland was never going to end the troubles and the
RUC was brought back in on the scene. Police men, especially local ones, are
much better at police work.

Giving it the title "War" may sound cool and exciting but it is
inaccurate.
No amount of wishful thinking will change that.

The only wishful thinking I see at present is this shared by the
greater part of the Western "intelligentsia". True to form, it is
always ready to substitute its fantasies for reality.

I suggest you widen your field of view then.

Why is saying it is (or isnt) a war anything to do with "fantasies?"

Calling it a war will not make it go away. Fighting terror as a war will
not
make it go away and is less likely to produce a "victory."

The western world bandies the term "war" around much too easily. (War on
Terror, War on Drugs, War on Obesity etc.)

Indeed, quite true. Yet, in this case, it is a real war.

Again. I disagree. The conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan is a real war. The
activity at airports and train stations is not a war.

It is all part of the same conflict.

It still isnt a war.

The conflict is global in nature.

And it still isnt a war.

Learn to see the forest behind the trees.

Learn to hear the truth behind the soundbite.

 

[Eeyore]

John Larkin wrote:

Graham has a pathological and mostly irrational hatred of America,

Not at all. I am however intruiged how Americancs invariably bring out the hate word the very second even the tiniest
criticism is voiced against them.

It's not hate at all, more like despair at the crass stupidity of your governmemnt and the ppl who elected them.

and makes up things to support that need.

Simply no need ever to do that !

So naturally he doesn't like to
be reminded about stuff like WWII or the Cold War. He believes that
the UK and Russia defeated Germany with little need for US assistance.

The USA was around 3 years late to the party of course. I have little doubt that Russia would have eventually defeated
Germany anyway. Germany could certainly never ever have defeated Russia, the numbers simply aren't even remotely
credible.

Graham

 

[T Wake]

<mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message
news:jUZTg.9$45.98@news.uchicago.edu...

In article <45205B23.8190A32@hotmail.com>, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> writes:


mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:

The Islamic terrorists aim at destruction of the western society

Where did you get that idea ?

From their own writings. Try to keep informed.

Which writings are they?

Which Islamic Terrorist movement are you referring to? Or do you lump them
all in as one? Are you able to see the difference between terrorist
organisations?

Is the "war" on terror a war against all terrorist organisations or just the
Islamic ones which have targeted the US?

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:08:56 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 09:09:14 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:
Jim Thompson wrote:

That's where we pretend we like the French ;-)

Sorry, Jim, but I'm not THAT good at playing pretend.

Don't worry. The French don't much like your kind of Americans either.

Graham

Heck, you can hardly get into a roadside rest area bathroom for the
crowds from the French tour busses. On our way back from Monterey, my
wife had to sit shivering at the Junipera Serra rest stop for that
very reason, waiting out a bus full of female French tourists. If you
go to the top of Twin Peaks in San Francisco, the language you're most
likely to overhear is German.

Stay home! The lines at Peet's Coffee and Joseph Schmidt Chocolate are
long enough already.

The attraction of the falling dollar and rising Euro of course.

Graham

The rooms at the Inn at Spanish Bay start at about $550, and europeans
are a glut there, too. But you can sit on the deck, overlooking the
ocean, next to a cozy open-air firepit, sipping a Guinness, and the
burger and fries are excellent. If you get chilly, they'll bring you
blankets. Golf is an insane activity, but golf resorts are almost
always a great place to stay.

John

 

"Jim Thompson" <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
message news:hdc2i255c7620nqeirkujfgcua360gb6qd@4ax.com...

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 07:52:41 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 14:17:53 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

The United States is the world's largest contributor of ODA in absolute
terms
($15.7 billion, 2003), but the *SMALLEST* among developed countries as a
percentage of its GDP (0.14% in 2003). The UN target for development aid
is 0.7%
of GDP; currently only five countries (with Norway in the lead with
0.92%) achieve
this." ( my emphasis )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aid


Graham





http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp


See "side notes on private contributions." Personally, both my wife
and I donate many thousands of dollars to the foreign-aid institutions
we believe in. This year, I will give maybe $20,000 to Doctors Without
Borders.

How much do you personally donate to things like this?

John

Sheeesh! Do a Google-groups search on Eeyore/Graham... he's a
depraved poster to porn groups, so he's probably in a cell, posting
from the prison library ;-)

Ummm...those references to eeyore liking pooh are not in fetish porn
groups...it's a children's story, and it's not the same eeyore. :^)

Eric Lucas

 

[John Fields]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 00:50:29 GMT, <lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

"Gordon" <gordonlr@DELETEswbell.net> wrote in message
news:vfj0i2ltkdg2atqfq93hr5usnqsd20b9q6@4ax.com...
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:14:02 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:


"Gordon" <gordonlr@DELETEswbell.net> wrote in message
news:00c0i29vn31ejl71pku1d0r1nfaevj6p4i@4ax.com...

So you are saying they are NOT better Xtians than everyone else?

No, I'm saying that this war on terrorism started long before
President Bush and the present Republican administration was
involved in any way.

But it isn't a war. It is a problem for a police force that requires
international cooperation, something the US is notoriously unable or
unwilling to be involved in.

Homer, I don't agree with you, but you are certainly entitled to
your opinion. A police force of international cooperation just
doesn't seem available.

Unfortunately that's true,

---
No, it isn't.

We're heavily involved with police forces around the world in an
effort to locate and neutralize civilian terrorist groups. Do you
doubt that? Just because you don't hear it being blabbed about on
the evening news doesn't mean it isn't happening.
---

but the really unfortunate thing is that it was a
result of the fact that our leader chose to piss off the entire rest of the
world with his cowboy antics.

---
Whether his actions (or, rather, the consequences of his decisions)
would piss off the rest of the world isn't something that should
stand in the way of his doing what he considers to be the right
thing.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Eeyore]

John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:00:32 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
John Larkin wrote:

I read about a recent experiment that was done in the UK. In response
to advertised job openings, good but fake resumes were invented and
sent in, with the only difference that some had English-sounding names
and some had Muslim-sounding names. The response ratio was about 5:1.

I suspect this is another urban myth actually. A similar thing was *really*
done with different ages in fact.

It's in here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Muslim#Islamophobia_in_Europe

" he asks whether Muslims will be the victims of the next pogroms "

See my post on this point.

That's why I laugh when American try lecturing us about being blind to the danger
from Islam. Do you guys seriously think we'd ever let them get the upper hand ?

Graham

 

"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message
newsaCdncUYRv5Ur7zYRVnyrQ@pipex.net...

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:45205916.9EE8E163@hotmail.com...


T Wake wrote:

mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message

I'll say again, it is a war, refusing to recognize it as such will not
make it go away.

I disagree. It is not a war. This is not a case of "refusing to
recognise it
as such." Wars are wars. Soldiers are notoriously bad at fighting
terrorism.
Terrorists are criminals.

Indeed. And no War on Crime has ever been won.

Heading down the road of philosophical arguments now, but would it be
possible to "win" a war on crime?

Yep, all it takes is a "Mission Accomplished" banner, and you too can
declare victory in your favorite war on x...and here's the best
part...without actually having to accomplish anything.

Eric Lucas

 

[T Wake]

<mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote in message
news:H84Ug.18$45.146@news.uchicago.edu...

In article <4520C734.BF44F5D0@hotmail.com>, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> writes:

There is no such thing as a coherent 'Islamic terrorist' movement, much as
the
USA would like to have you
believe it. Much Islamic terrorism isn't even targeted at the West.

There wasn't such thing as a coherent "Axis" in 1939-40.

So what? WWII wasn't fought against a coherent Axis.

There were
three separate nations, pursuing separate goals, often in
non-coordinated fashion,

Well, this explains why America refused to get involved until their
interests were threatened.

All you are doing is re-iterating irrelevant global politics.

at times even in a way which was detrimental
to the other Axis members goals.
Mussolini's invasion of Greece was
not coordinated with Hitler, in fact Hitler wasn't informed at all,

So what? Are you trying to imply that given time all the nations of the
middle east will form into a super power and invade Poland?

and the fact that Germany had to bail Mussolini out over there put a
few weeks delay in the preparations for Barbarossa (few weeks which
turned quite crucial). Similarly (and on a bigger scale) neither
Germany nor Italy were informed of Japan's plans to hit Pearl Harbor
and move southward into the Pacific, a move which enabled the USSR, at
a critical moment, to transfer tens of first class divisions from
Eastern Siberia to the Moscow front and successfully repel the German
attack over there.

So, no, there was nothing like a unified "Axis command" in place.
What was there, was a common mindset, one which viewed the existing
world order as weak and ripe for being overturned, and which
sanctioned the use of all available means in order to achieve this
goal. That's all.

So what?

You should study some history. Your blip about Chamberlain was most
entertaining.

You need to stop watching the History Channels repeats and inject some
relevance.

The scariest analogies to WWII are the state of Germany in the 1930s. A
despotic leader re-affirmed public support in his otherwise crackpot
government by creating a "bugbear" enemy out of a religious group. The same
despot undermined and ignore the League of Nations because he felt his
country was "glorious and powerful" enough to not have to listen to other
countries.

Using the second world war as an analogy for the steps taken to dismantle
the Islamic terrorist threat to the west is pretty off the wall.

 

[Eeyore]

John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:06:00 +0100, Eeyore wrote:

How much do you personally donate to things like this?

I don't have to account for it thank you and I certainly don't have the kind of income
that would allow me to donate anything like you do. We do however have a government
that does it on our behalf, not to mention the likes of Oxfam etc... in the 'voluntary
sector' who are normally very fast off the mark when need is high.

Graham

In other words, nothing. In Texas, people like you are called "all hat
and no horse."

It's none of your business.

Unlike some who like to look the other way when a collecting tin comes round, I don't
though.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 08:37:41 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

Sheeesh! Do a Google-groups search on Eeyore/Graham... he's a
depraved poster to porn groups, so he's probably in a cell, posting
from the prison library ;-)

...Jim Thompson

Really? What sort of smut does he specialize in? Probably the
non-procreative British kind.

I'm all ears to hear what juicy tidbits Jim has to offer.

Graham

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 08:58:50 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:00:32 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 08:47:23 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 02:33:19 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:

The US is not demonizing Islam, at this point. It makes the
distinction between Islam and Islamic extremism.

I can assure you that many Americans don't understand the difference.

How many is "many"? Seven? If "many" means "a significant fraction",
then you are, as usual, inventing anti-American "facts."

The majority who post on Usenet for sure !

It seems to me that the US War on Terror has simply created a new kind of
hostile racism or culture'ism of a sort.

Graham

I read about a recent experiment that was done in the UK. In response
to advertised job openings, good but fake resumes were invented and
sent in, with the only difference that some had English-sounding names
and some had Muslim-sounding names. The response ratio was about 5:1.

I suspect this is another urban myth actually. A similar thing was *really*
done with different ages in fact.


It's in here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Muslim#Islamophobia_in_Europe

John

Yep. However I wouldn't hang my hat on anything CAIR has to offer.
Around here they spout all kinds of hate, refuse to say anything
negative about extremism, nor be interviewed by the media.

My feeling is that if American Muslims can't/won't be outspoken
against their extremist brothers, in an out-and-out world blow-up
they'll be rounded up into camps just like the Japanese-Americans in
WWII... deservedly... "silence implies consent" (Sir Thomas More).

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 09:02:37 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 08:37:41 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 07:52:41 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 14:17:53 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

The United States is the world's largest contributor of ODA in absolute terms
($15.7 billion, 2003), but the *SMALLEST* among developed countries as a
percentage of its GDP (0.14% in 2003). The UN target for development aid is 0.7%
of GDP; currently only five countries (with Norway in the lead with 0.92%) achieve
this." ( my emphasis )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aid


Graham





http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp


See "side notes on private contributions." Personally, both my wife
and I donate many thousands of dollars to the foreign-aid institutions
we believe in. This year, I will give maybe $20,000 to Doctors Without
Borders.

How much do you personally donate to things like this?

John

Sheeesh! Do a Google-groups search on Eeyore/Graham... he's a
depraved poster to porn groups, so he's probably in a cell, posting
from the prison library ;-)

...Jim Thompson


Really? What sort of smut does he specialize in? Probably the
non-procreative British kind.

John

Probably ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Gordon]

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 04:01:20 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:9c11i2dvshqagolpbfneulpfegh53tpgiv@4ax.com...

I seem to recall references to "Shock and Awe". Doesn't sound like the
cops
to me - unless it's the nutjob US cops who shoot everything in sight.

Very select things actually.

Police shoot at unarmed man 41 times

An investigation has been launched into why four New York police officers
fired 41 shots at an unarmed man with no criminal record.
Amadou "Ahmed" Diallo, 22, died after he was hit at least 19 times as he
entered his Bronx apartment building. The bullets pierced him in every major
organ including his heart, lungs and liver.
"It looks like one guy may have panicked and the rest followed suit," a
police official told The New York Times on Friday.
Friends said Mr Diallo emigrated from Guinea-Bissau after fleeing civil
strife in Mauritania in 1997. He worked 12 hours a day as a peddler, sending
much of his earnings back to his parents.
As he returned home on Thursday, four undercover police officers
investigating a recent shooting of a cab driver approached him and
identified themselves.
Police sources said Mr Diallo reached into his pocket and the officers, who
are all white, thought he was going for a gun.
Mr Diallo died at the scene. A beeper and wallet were all that were found
beside his bullet-riddled body.
"The police told me it was a mistake," Mr Diallo's roommate, Momodou Kujabi,
told the press.
The officers, three of whom have shot civilians in the past, were all police
veterans with five years or more on the force.

This is sad and very unfortunate. The thing we must ask ourselves

is, had I been one of the cops would/should I have waited for the
suspect to pull what ever he had in his pocket out and just hope
it wasn't a gun?

I should think there was a language barrier, and the suspect
didn't understand what the cops were trying to tell him to do and
the cops didn't understand the suspect's replies to their
commands. The cops probably thought he was going for a gun, and
weren't willing to just wait and see if he started shooting.

Gordon

 

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:hrd2i2poggeqcjmqe03i24fclgma2p9gur@4ax.com...

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:06:00 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



How much do you personally donate to things like this?

I don't have to account for it thank you and I certainly don't have the
kind of income
that would allow me to donate anything like you do. We do however have a
government
that does it on our behalf, not to mention the likes of Oxfam etc... in
the 'voluntary
sector' who are normally very fast off the mark when need is high.

In other words, nothing. In Texas, people like you are called "all hat
and no horse."

You might want to remember that private monetary matters are just
that--private. Just because you chose to parade yours around in public just
to show how big your genitalia are, doesn't mean that anybody else is
obligated to. I guess Texans don't have any manners as regards the privacy
of private matters.

Eric Lucas