Jihad needs scientists

[JoeBloe]

On 10 Oct 2006 01:58:32 GMT, "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@aon.at>
Gave us:

JoeBloe wrote:

On 10 Oct 2006 00:52:56 GMT, "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@aon.at
Gave us:


Who cares about that? Bill Gates might also top post....

But he doesn't, dipshit.


He is much longer in Usenet than you.

His first post was earlier.

He doesn't use it at all now, and hasn't for years, so NO, he is NOT
longer in Usenet than I, you clueless twit.

 

[joseph2k]

Eeyore wrote:

John Fields wrote:

And, generally, speaking, airliners don't stray miles away from
their flight paths

What gave you the idea it had ?

and do respond when contacted by the military.

To not do so _is_ madness.

It did !

Reading a bit more.....

" When Carlson [commanding officer of the USS Sides which was nearby]
concluded that the Vincennes was referring to IR655 when making its
warning to turn away or receive fire ( on a military frequency only - my
comment ) he urgently warned IR655 on a civilian freqency that it was in
danger, having been mistaken for a military craft and should turn away.
IR655 immediately complied and changed course onto a trajectory away from
the Vincennes. The Vincennes fired regardless. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655#Independent_sources

Graham
It is wise to be thoughtful about information in publically editable

documents.
--
JosephKK
Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.  
--Schiller

 

[Eeyore]

JoeBloe wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:25:10 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

It's seriously tempting to report you for abuse.

I reckon Cox as a decent ISP wouldn't be amused by online threatening behaviour.

I didn't threaten anyone, dumbass. All I mentioned was that his
stupid behavior in Usenet has a greater potential of getting him in a
shitcan than me.

You need to get a clue, fucktard, and stop accusing everyone of
making threats.

You need to learn what the word "threaten" means, because right now
you have no clue whatsoever. Nor do you have any clue as to the
context used in an ISP's TOS agreement...

I am very familiar with TOSs and AUPs actually.

Which I never even signed, BTW, dumbass.
Bwuahahahahahahah!

You aren't required to sign it. Using them as an ISP implies acceptance of their
terms.

Graham

 

[joseph2k]

T Wake wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:452A6294.FC8DD10B@hotmail.com...


T Wake wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
John Fields wrote:

And, generally, speaking, airliners don't stray miles away from
their flight paths

What gave you the idea it had ?

and do respond when contacted by the military.

To not do so _is_ madness.

It did !

Reading a bit more.....

" When Carlson [commanding officer of the USS Sides which was nearby]
concluded that
the Vincennes was referring to IR655 when making its warning to turn
away
or receive
fire ( on a military frequency only - my comment ) he urgently warned
IR655 on a
civilian freqency that it was in danger, having been mistaken for a
military craft and
should turn away. IR655 immediately complied and changed course onto a
trajectory away
from the Vincennes. The Vincennes fired regardless. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655#Independent_sources

I never noticed that. Makes things a bit gloomier.

For me personally, the purpose of this branch of the debate is not to
seek
closure on the incident but to highlight the "world image" problem that
America suffers from.

Quite so and I find it truly amazing that seemingly well-educated
engineers
should still find no error with this kind of behaviour.



Well, that is engineers for you..........................
Actually it is better described as lack of timely, reliable information.

All militaries are prone to this.
--
JosephKK
Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.  
--Schiller

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 18:49:35 GMT, Jonathan Kirwan
<jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote:

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 09:03:48 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:37:23 GMT, <lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message
news:uOCdnaYSs6Z5oLfYRVnygg@pipex.net...
My biggest issue with the UK government at the moment stems on the way we
are throwing away rights and freedoms I grew up to take for granted
(possibly part of the problem).

I disagree--I think most Western nations view those rights as (to use a word
from one of our founding documents), inalienable--as they should.

The Founders certainly didn't have our modern idea of "privacy." For
the first 200 years of the Republic, it was illegal to use the US
Mails for "immoral" purposes, and mail was opened, and people
prosecuted for felonies, if immorality was suspected. Such
"immorality" included explicit letters between a husband and his wife.

I don't think that any of the Founders would think it unreasonable to
snoop on international communications, or even domestic
communications, looking for signs of known conspiracies to commit
murder. They did list "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" in
that order.

The current concept of privacy as a Constitutional right was cobbled
up by the Supremes to justify the Roe-v-Wade thing.

Hardly, John. I suspect you've not really been reading your history
much. The concept of privacy as a right abounds within any reasonable
interpretation of the Constitution itself, as well as in the
Declaration of Independence explicitly, as well as in the debates over
ratification, debates raging in the New York Journal of the day, and
in the personal letters -- those anyway for which we still have copies
of today.

But setting aside those details, of which you appear ignorant, there
was also quite a deep concern about rights, generally. Some states
had specific declarations that prevented gov't from encroaching the
rights of minority groups (majority groups don't need protections, as
they can pass laws easily to get what they want.) Some states didn't.
On early development of the Constitution, there were no Amendments
specifically attached. And there was deep concern among many,
including Jefferson who wrote about this lack, that there was a
specific need to list at least some of the more important ones so that
there would be no possibility of mistake in later generations.

Hamilton argued fiercely, though, against their inclusion. He argued
that they would become our prison bars, as later generations would
imagine that having listed any at all, that those were all there were
to protect. Like owning 1000 acres of land and putting up a tiny
picket fence around only 1 acre about your solitary home, others
arriving into the area might very well imagine that you only claimed
just one acre, because that is where you put your fence. Jefferson
likened putting out explicit rights very much like this picket fence
that later generations might imagine, or be convinced to imagine, was
the only real province of their rights. When, in fact, quite the
opposite was true -- that the listing of some rights should not at all
be construed as to mean that others did not also exist and with equal
force, too. So we have the 9th Amendment added, to satisfy Hamilton.
It's known as "The Hamilton Amendment."

The principle guiding the writing of the Constitution of the US is
that "All rights reside within the individuals and that individuals
cede to gov't only those rights they deem are necessary for the good
of the whole and only for so long as that continues to be the case."
The presumption here is that gov't has NO RIGHTS at all and that only
individuals innately have rights; that individuals choose consciously
to cede only some of those rights to gov't for such good purposes as
seem appropriate for a time.

The point is that the right to privacy was not some silly concoction
to satisfy some weird, twisted means to write Roe v. Wade the way it
is. The right to privacy is quite real, apart from any of that.

Being ignorant of this is excusable. But claiming that the "current
concept of privacy as a Constitutional right was cobbled up by the
Supremes to justify the Roe-v-Wade thing," isn't excusable. It's not
even enough right to be considered wrong. It's just pure ignorance
speaking.

Jon

I studied the Jefferson-Hamilton debate in school, as most of us have,
and I'm not ignorant of it. Amendment 4,

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall
not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,
supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the
place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

doesn't address whether the people have a right to privacy when
engaged in public affairs, or when using a NASA-launched satellite to
send messages to another country. Censorship of international
correspondence in time of war would not have shocked the Founders.

Your insertion of phrases like "of which you appear ignorant" is
silly. And I don't care what you consider to be "excusable" because
you have no means of enforcing your rules. So you might stick to
trying to make sense.

John

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

JoeBloe wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:03:16 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:



John Fields wrote:

I think a trip to the shrink is something you should seriously consider.

I think a dose of reality is something you should seriously consider.


The next thing the group will see is your retarded ass declaring that
N. Korea is a great place, and they should be allowed to develop
whatever weapons of war they wish.

Its a good thing for England that the demented donkey doesn't believe
North Korea's missiles and warheads are any threat.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Eeyore]

Daniel Mandic wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:

I think a trip to the shrink is something you should seriously
consider.

I think a dose of reality is something you should seriously consider.

Graham

Hallo Graham,

He have a dose Beer

Even at beer-drinking he is beginning to stuck... ah, struggle

My Favorites are: Schneider Weiße (Yeast white-beer), Kilkenny,
Budweiser, Staro Brno and Reininghaus (local beer).

I've tried a white beer but didn't really find it to my liking.

Holsten Pils ( brewed in Germany ) is one of my favourites.

Graham

 

[JoeBloe]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 03:22:02 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

JoeBloe wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:25:10 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

It's seriously tempting to report you for abuse.

I reckon Cox as a decent ISP wouldn't be amused by online threatening behaviour.

I didn't threaten anyone, dumbass. All I mentioned was that his
stupid behavior in Usenet has a greater potential of getting him in a
shitcan than me.

You need to get a clue, fucktard, and stop accusing everyone of
making threats.

You need to learn what the word "threaten" means, because right now
you have no clue whatsoever. Nor do you have any clue as to the
context used in an ISP's TOS agreement...

I am very familiar with TOSs and AUPs actually.

Apparently not, however, with the meanings of many of the words used
therein.

Which I never even signed, BTW, dumbass.
Bwuahahahahahahah!

You aren't required to sign it. Using them as an ISP implies acceptance of their
terms.

Maybe on your side of the pond.

They are more than happy to keep taking my monthly payment, which
involves far more than just the net connection.

I'd have to be an outright terrorist to get whacked by them, and
since I am in the business of whacking the terrorists, or at least
facilitating such, I doubt they'll be fucking with me any time soon,
you terrorist sympathizing, US hating twit.

 

[JoeBloe]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 03:31:18 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

Daniel Mandic wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:

I think a trip to the shrink is something you should seriously
consider.

I think a dose of reality is something you should seriously consider.

Graham

Hallo Graham,

He have a dose Beer

Even at beer-drinking he is beginning to stuck... ah, struggle

My Favorites are: Schneider Wei?e (Yeast white-beer), Kilkenny,
Budweiser, Staro Brno and Reininghaus (local beer).

I've tried a white beer but didn't really find it to my liking.

Holsten Pils ( brewed in Germany ) is one of my favourites.

The best:

Chimay Gold Belgian Ale

Brewed in 100 gallon oak casks with 150 year old uncontaminated
yeast.

Second:

Good ol' Sam Adams

Won awards in the beer capital of the world... Germany!

 

[Eeyore]

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

JoeBloe wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:
John Fields wrote:

I think a trip to the shrink is something you should seriously consider.

I think a dose of reality is something you should seriously consider.

The next thing the group will see is your retarded ass declaring that
N. Korea is a great place, and they should be allowed to develop
whatever weapons of war they wish.

Its a good thing for England that the demented donkey doesn't believe
North Korea's missiles and warheads are any threat.

Not to us directly right now for sure.

Taking action over N Korea actually makes sense whereas Iraq never did.

Shame you guys are tied up there now isn't it ? Talk about backing a losing horse
!

Graham

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

joseph2k wrote:

And yes, they use that paper check to track you also. If you ever go to a
VA hospital they set up even more accounts to track you. Are you getting
the picture yet?

No, just your usual static. Spill the beans for everyone to see the
deep dark government secrets.

What "Accounts"? I am 100% disabled, living on a VA disability
pension so what "Accounts" are you talking about? More accounts if I'm
in the hospital? I am on zero co-pay because of my disability, so there
is nothing to charge for while in the hospital, although, I won't be
paid my disability pension while in the VA hospital.

Do you think the government knows less about you, than me?

I've worked in broadcast engineering and defense electronics most of
my life, so they have always kept track of me, from the time I was first
drafted. If you think you have any real secrets from them, you are more
deluded than I thought.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Eeyore]

JoeBloe wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:
JoeBloe wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

It's seriously tempting to report you for abuse.

I reckon Cox as a decent ISP wouldn't be amused by online threatening behaviour.

I didn't threaten anyone, dumbass. All I mentioned was that his
stupid behavior in Usenet has a greater potential of getting him in a
shitcan than me.

You need to get a clue, fucktard, and stop accusing everyone of
making threats.

You need to learn what the word "threaten" means, because right now
you have no clue whatsoever. Nor do you have any clue as to the
context used in an ISP's TOS agreement...

I am very familiar with TOSs and AUPs actually.

Apparently not, however, with the meanings of many of the words used
therein.

Have you any idea how any dickheads' accounts ( who chose to make an issue of
dickheadedness behaviour ) I've had cancelled ?

I've even had success with a clot who was using an anonymising service.

Graham

 

[JoeBloe]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 03:47:42 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

Have you any idea how any dickheads' accounts ( who chose to make an issue of
dickheadedness behaviour ) I've had cancelled ?

You're a legend in your own mind, asswipe.

I've even had success with a clot who was using an anonymising service.

Good for you, Johnny! Ya stupid fucktard.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

John Larkin wrote:

I studied the Jefferson-Hamilton debate in school, as most of us have,
and I'm not ignorant of it. Amendment 4,

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall
not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,
supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the
place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

doesn't address whether the people have a right to privacy when
engaged in public affairs, or when using a NASA-launched satellite to
send messages to another country. Censorship of international
correspondence in time of war would not have shocked the Founders.

Your insertion of phrases like "of which you appear ignorant" is
silly. And I don't care what you consider to be "excusable" because
you have no means of enforcing your rules. So you might stick to
trying to make sense.

Soldiers letters home were censored during WW II, I have seen
pictures of letters with words or sentences cut out. I have a DVD with
some WW II training films, including one about "Loose Lips Sink Ships",
telling the military what they could, and could not write home about in
any war related effort.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[joseph2k]

T Wake wrote:

"joseph2k" <quiettechblue@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:CYXVg.3026$NE6.2914@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

T Wake wrote:

This is a logical fallacy. Everything you have said can be true and
still
it would not disprove anything YD has written.

Insulting someone does not change the validity of their comments, nor
does eliciting sympathy for yourself.


If I needed sympathy, I wouldn't visit the vast troll playground
known as Usenet. ;-)


Top drawer reply Mr. Terrell.


To paraphrase your comments to me, if you want to indulge in a group hug
take it to Email.

What a coward, attempting to misdirect replies to a bit bucket
(alt.local.village.idiot). Turnabout is fair play.

JosephKK
Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.  
--Schiller

 

[Eeyore]

JoeBloe wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 03:47:42 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

Have you any idea how any dickheads' accounts ( who chose to make an issue of
dickheadedness behaviour ) I've had cancelled ?

You're a legend in your own mind, asswipe.

Do *you* have a newsgroup named after you ?

Graham

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:50:52 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

I studied the Jefferson-Hamilton debate in school, as most of us have,
and I'm not ignorant of it. Amendment 4,

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall
not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,
supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the
place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

doesn't address whether the people have a right to privacy when
engaged in public affairs, or when using a NASA-launched satellite to
send messages to another country. Censorship of international
correspondence in time of war would not have shocked the Founders.

Your insertion of phrases like "of which you appear ignorant" is
silly. And I don't care what you consider to be "excusable" because
you have no means of enforcing your rules. So you might stick to
trying to make sense.


Soldiers letters home were censored during WW II, I have seen
pictures of letters with words or sentences cut out. I have a DVD with
some WW II training films, including one about "Loose Lips Sink Ships",
telling the military what they could, and could not write home about in
any war related effort.

There's always a compromise between liberty and safety. That's why we
have traffic lights.

John

 

[joseph2k]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

joseph2k wrote:

And yes, they use that paper check to track you also. If you ever go to
a
VA hospital they set up even more accounts to track you. Are you getting
the picture yet?


No, just your usual static. Spill the beans for everyone to see the
deep dark government secrets.

What "Accounts"? I am 100% disabled, living on a VA disability
pension so what "Accounts" are you talking about? More accounts if I'm
in the hospital? I am on zero co-pay because of my disability, so there
is nothing to charge for while in the hospital, although, I won't be
paid my disability pension while in the VA hospital.

Do you think the government knows less about you, than me?

I've worked in broadcast engineering and defense electronics most of
my life, so they have always kept track of me, from the time I was first
drafted. If you think you have any real secrets from them, you are more
deluded than I thought.

Thank you for making my point for me. And yes, i am well aware that i will
be forever monitored because of my military service time.

--
JosephKK
Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.  
--Schiller

 

[joseph2k]

lucasea@sbcglobal.net wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:rfoli2ln4911r52r106i82beiib20uo3k4@4ax.com...
On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 22:42:45 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



John Fields wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
John Fields wrote:
On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 00:32:13 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
John Fields wrote:

And, generally, speaking, airliners don't stray miles away from
their flight paths

What gave you the idea it had ?

and do respond when contacted by the military.

To not do so _is_ madness.

It did !

Reading a bit more.....

" When Carlson [commanding officer of the USS Sides which was
nearby] concluded that
the Vincennes was referring to IR655 when making its warning to
turn away or receive
fire ( on a military frequency only - my comment ) he urgently
warned IR655 on a
civilian freqency that it was in danger, having been mistaken for a
military craft and
should turn away. IR655 immediately complied and changed course
onto a trajectory away
from the Vincennes. The Vincennes fired regardless. "


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655#Independent_sources

Oh, well... shit happens.

If the USA had said that, no doubt in more diplomatic terms, and
compensated the families
of those killed along with Iran Air for the loss of its Airbus, I'm
sure there would still
have been some justifiable grumbles but the USA would at least be seen
to have discharged
its moral obligations. Instead the relatives had to take the USA to
court and the
bitterness continues.

Oh, well... shit happens.

That seems to cover most American actions these days.

Everybody's. We just get blamed more for it because we do more,
chump.

Waaaaaa, that's nothing but a whiny bullshit excuse for more bad behavior.
We get blamed for more because, as the self-proclaimed cops of the free
world, we *should* be held to a much higher standard. If we're going to
try to take the high road and shove our values down other peoples'
throats, we damn well better make sure we live up to those values first.

If an Iranian warship had gunned down an American passenger jet in
climbing flight in an established commercial traffic pattern for "no good
reason" (as I'm sure we would loudly proclaim, if the tables were turned),
we would have
bombed Teheran into oblivion without thinking twice. What takes courage
and
heart is to understand *their* point of view, and meet them halfway. It's
called diplomacy, and it says a lot bad about our country that we refused
to.

Eric Lucas

Gosh, from the way you talk, we have cut off foriegn aid to these countries.

--
JosephKK
Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens.  
--Schiller

 

[JoeBloe]

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 04:40:29 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

JoeBloe wrote:

On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 03:47:42 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

Have you any idea how any dickheads' accounts ( who chose to make an issue of
dickheadedness behaviour ) I've had cancelled ?

You're a legend in your own mind, asswipe.

Do *you* have a newsgroup named after you ?

No. Nor do you, fucktard.