Jihad needs scientists

[Keith]

In article <IjTUg.51404$E67.14436@clgrps13>, nobody@nowhere.com
says...

"Keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f8db6b8105f0bb9989d69@News.Individual.NET...

Phones (of the domestic type, anyway) aren't tapped without
warrant. Get with the program.

How would you ever know?

*You*don't know, so you assume thay are. Your tinfoil hat is

slipping.

--
Keith

 

[T Wake]

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4523D85F.43BBD99C@earthlink.net...

Jim Thompson wrote:

I should know shortly what low-life job Eric has at Battelle... my
guess is janitor ;-)


Are you sure they would give him that much responsibility?

It is interesting that instead of disagreeing with Eric's comments and
explaining why, the general response has been to criticise his imagined work
status.

Nothing I have seen in this thread seems to relate to his job and he has not
claimed professional authority based on his employment so what, on Earth,
does his job matter?

Unless this really is a pathetic attempt to "one up" on someone you think is
in a lower paid / less "exalted" job. If it is, you really should be ashamed
of yourselves.

 

[T Wake]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4522F755.6FBE3BED@hotmail.com...

T Wake wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote

That's not my recollection.

Ok, it is my recollection though.

Fair nuff !

You need to stop reading too much implied criticism where there isnt
any.

There's been *loads* !

In my posts?

A misunderstanding it seems.

Possibly. The joys of the text based USENET.

 

[T Wake]

"Keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f8d949b973606e3989d61@News.Individual.NET...

In article <MMqdnSZ0oLqTC7_YRVnyiA@pipex.net>,
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com says...
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:QQeUg.977$NE6.665@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...

"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message
news:XOSdncxhP5FZ_bzYRVnyvQ@pipex.net...

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:qsh2i2drpinua4j4gbg6utio5ap565jm4q@4ax.com...

Yeah, like: "If we give you this money will you promise to use it to
feed your people and not to make weapons with it?"

Or "If we give you this money will you promise to use it to buy
weapons
and fight [Insert Disliked Government of the Day] and promise never to
fight us - unless you really have to?"

Oh, you mean like the Reagen and Clinton administrations did with Osama
bin Laden when he was fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan?

Sadly, yes.

Another idiot heard from.

It's Ok, I am sure you aren't an idiot. If you had posted something
meaningful we may have been able to verify that.

Never mind.

 

[Keith]

In article <agv7i2pg53fpcufr7bbch84t8g3ibauqgj@4ax.com>,
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says...

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 18:55:23 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



Keith wrote:

To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com says...
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 16:39:04 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 16:13:11 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 16:25:32 +0100, Eeyore wrote:

Bunch of damn cowboys.

Yaaa-hoo!

John

Which reminds me that it's time to mosey on home and watch the next
episode of "Deadwood"

John

I'll get out my copy of "Tombstone" ;-)

Meanwhile, the stuffed donkey will watch the documentary about the
wild west, "Blazing Saddles".

I've never watched it. It's far too tedious.

Graham

Most of Mel Brooks' stuff is loaded with Hollywood insider jokes,
usually mocking studio fatheads.

And Nazis and other anti-semites. Maybe that's why the stuffed
donkey doesn't like Mel Brooks. The humor hits too close to home.

His "Robin Hood: Men in Tights" did a
nice job on Kevin Cosner. Like in Wodehouse's books, the plots are
just a framework to hold things up.

--
Keith

 

[Eeyore]

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Keith wrote:

Meanwhile, the stuffed donkey will watch the documentary about the
wild west, "Blazing Saddles".

He should pay close attention to the scene where someone punches out
the horse.

Your American Love of Violence is once again nnoted.

Do you think that violence is the only way to 'win an argument' ?

Graham

 

[T Wake]

"Keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f8db9d68e963bff989d6e@News.Individual.NET...

In article <%8RUg.8425$GR.1728@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net says...

"Keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f8d949b973606e3989d61@News.Individual.NET...

Oh, you mean like the Reagen and Clinton administrations did with
Osama
bin Laden when he was fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan?

Sadly, yes.

Another idiot heard from.

You don't believe that former administrations provided substantial
support
to two people/organizations who have subsequently turned against the US?
You need to read more, it's well-known.

It's well known that the Quarterbacking on Monday morning is much
better than that on Sunday afternoon too. What a maroon!

What a response. You are truly at the cutting edge of debate Sir.

As you don't really say anything except phrases used by others, can I assume
from this you think previous US administrations didn't train and equip Usma
Bin Laden and the Taleban during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan?

Or are you just trying to impress your friends with the funny quotes you can
copy and paste?

 

[T Wake]

"Dirk Bruere at NeoPax" <dirk.bruere@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4ogbnnFek6t3U1@individual.net...

T Wake wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4522EF28.B56A19B@hotmail.com...

T Wake wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
T Wake wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
T Wake wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
Is Hezbollah a terrorist organisation ?
If you are asking my opinion..... then yes. A nasty, ruthless one.
However sometimes terrorists seem to come in from the cold.
That's the point at which they've won.
Looks like they won in that case.
Do you count Hizbullah as a terrorist organisation?
I don't see a clear cut black and white case either way quite frankly.
Fair one. Which side of the fence do you put them on a a personal
opinion?
I truthfully don't know enough to make a decision.

Ok.

The Turkish Gov't has a similar problem with the KDP.
Also Terrorists.
But our friends !

Yep. Still terrorists though. If they weren't helping in Iraq we'd be
helping exterminate them.

Probably still will if Iraq breaks up.
Then Turkey gets given its 'get out of jail free' card by the US for
whatever acts of genocide they decide to inflict upon the new Kurdish
republic.

Yep. Turkey is a close enough "Ally" in the war on terror that it seems
unlike too much will be said over the acts. Bit like Pakistan really.

 

[T Wake]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4522FB24.C8C44BB0@hotmail.com...

T Wake wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
T Wake wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote

The Turkish Gov't has a similar problem with the KDP.

Also Terrorists.

But our friends !

Yep. Still terrorists though. If they weren't helping in Iraq we'd be
helping exterminate them.

And finish off Saddam's work ? !!!

Yep. Not just Saddam eithe, the Iranians kill loads of them as well.

Not very popular in the region really.

The above neatly exposes the flaw in the 'war on terror'. It's a
war-on-terror-unless-you're-convenient-to-us war.

Yep.

 

[Daniel Mandic]

Homer J Simpson wrote:

9/11 was Bush's failure.

Hi Homer J Simpson!



USA lacks a comparative counting problem.

What happened two seconds before this, what has he done in the last
minutes. What have people thought, after they heard of the first
airplane attack. 32 min after the first crash happened this, and that.
Combining always arab counting style into.

It is no wonder you get mad.... (numerology may be fine, but the US
medias are pressing too much into this) and no wonder it gets no
better. Dimiss the arabic numbers and it might help. Who knows?
Dismiss also the Latin Letters, if you wish. I care my Shitpaper
about...


A failure of Bush? Why, you could say by hard, it was the fault of many
hundred passengers. The Terrorists did not have mass attack weaponry
withthem. So far I know... please correct me if I am wrong.



Best regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[Daniel Mandic]

Keith wrote:

You are a two-faced bastard. That fact is well established by your
posts.

You would like to say, a Neanderthaler descendant is a two-faced
bastard.

Keep Care...


They might act two sided but they think once. Thousand times better
than any ...[putyourself here]... (Ape?... Bush)))

You might care to consider what that might do for your credibility.

You might want to consider what you do for your country's
credibility.

I guess Eyore is English. My dear they are also dangerous, but they
have Class, at least. Getting better and better, indeed. USA thumps
from one desaster to the next ****



Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[T Wake]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4523043D.43472808@hotmail.com...

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:

T Wake wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
T Wake wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
T Wake wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
T Wake wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
Is Hezbollah a terrorist organisation ?
If you are asking my opinion..... then yes. A nasty, ruthless
one.
However sometimes terrorists seem to come in from the cold.
That's the point at which they've won.
Looks like they won in that case.
Do you count Hizbullah as a terrorist organisation?
I don't see a clear cut black and white case either way quite
frankly.
Fair one. Which side of the fence do you put them on a a personal
opinion?
I truthfully don't know enough to make a decision.

Ok.

The Turkish Gov't has a similar problem with the KDP.
Also Terrorists.
But our friends !

Yep. Still terrorists though. If they weren't helping in Iraq we'd be
helping exterminate them.

Probably still will if Iraq breaks up.
Then Turkey gets given its 'get out of jail free' card by the US for
whatever acts of genocide they decide to inflict upon the new Kurdish
republic.

From the USA maybe but the EU's on their backs now.

That membership carrot carries a lot of weight.

Possibly not as much as support from the US can carry though.

 

[T Wake]

"Homer J Simpson" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:deDUg.49809$E67.22016@clgrps13...

"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message
news:aoKdnXd-lJu2e7_YnZ2dnUVZ8qCdnZ2d@pipex.net...

The Turkish Gov't has a similar problem with the KDP.

Also Terrorists.

But what are the Turks to the Armenians?

The survivors or the ones they killed?

 

[T Wake]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:e7n7i2lm8hrj9s0k5vk83nncju06avevi5@4ax.com...

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 21:30:52 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:

T Wake wrote:
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
T Wake wrote:

The same reason unthinking Muslims support groups considered
terrorist by
the west.

Is Hezbollah a terrorist organisation ?

If you are asking my opinion..... then yes. A nasty, ruthless one.
However
sometimes terrorists seem to come in from the cold.

That's the point at which they've won.

Looks like they won in that case.

---
A skirmish, perhaps, but not the war.

Surely though, at that point the "war" is over.

 

[Keith]

In article <0h18i21ket4s0m5rkk8gckp0kk4oih33hh@4ax.com>, To-Email-
Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com says...

On Wed, 04 Oct 06 14:48:36 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:

In article <MPG.1f8db6b8105f0bb9989d69@News.Individual.NET>,
Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
[snip]

Phones (of the domestic type, anyway) aren't tapped without
warrant. Get with the program.


Tapped? That's semantics. How does the NSA know a call is going to involve
someone of interest? They monitor all calls and a computer "listens" for
certain key words and phrases.

[snip]

That's rarely the case, and not without warrant.

What NSA was doing was using computer perusal of telephone _records_,
"To/From" data.

From those suspicious records, taps were authorized by a judge.

YEs, and the foreign "taps" were intercepted calls from
"interesting" foreign numbers. They were not taps on phones.

--
Keith

 

[T Wake]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4522FA58.7888451@hotmail.com...

T Wake wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote

It's called realpolitik.

Call it anything you want. It gets in the way of solving the problem.

What would your answer be?

Go for it. I consider myself a realist. I doubt that all the answers will
be
entirely pure-as-driven-snow 100% ethical, they never are.

The problem is one of history though.

For example, we are currently in a situation where people are "getting
revenge" for acts carried out against their people by the Oppressor
(Palestinians vs Israel for example). As part of this thought experiment we
imagine a situation where the "West" decides to enforce a cease fire and
forces Israel to give the Palestinians land, coastline, water etc.

Now, fast forward 50 years and picture a group of disaffected Israeli boys
being whipped into a murderous fervour by a Rabbi who is telling them how
the dirty Arabs stole their lands and how they should exact revenge. Off
they go, with their guns and kill some Arabs. The cycle continues.

 

[Keith]

In article <452408AA.F58E3945@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Keith wrote:

Meanwhile, the stuffed donkey will watch the documentary about the
wild west, "Blazing Saddles".

He should pay close attention to the scene where someone punches out
the horse.

Your American Love of Violence is once again nnoted.

Do you think that violence is the only way to 'win an argument' ?

Perhaps not, but if you're dead you certainly 'lost the argument'
(why the single quotes, I have no idea). The Islamists certainly
want you to lose the argument.

--
Keith

 

[T Wake]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:aoe7i21tk8sssrs4pk0ih2suo1b1k0gder@4ax.com...

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 18:23:50 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

T Wake wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message

I input: "This paté smells like cat shit."

and I got back: "Ce pâté sent comme la merde de chat."

How would you translate it?

I wouldn't. I'd just speak English very loudly and very slowly.

---
How brutal. If you didn't understand French and they spoke French to
you, very loudly and very slowly, would you understand what they
were trying to say?

How much sweeter to be able to softly crush an opponent with his own
tongue.

Nah. Sweeted to accept the fact that even the last superpower speaks a
language named after your own country.

---

There is a
reason we had an Empire.

---
Yes, you took it at swordpoint. Nothing very subtle about that!

Nope. Good wasn't it.

We bought a lot of it as well though.

---

There's also a reason most French can understand English.

---
American liberation of France in WW2?

Then they would speak American.

 

[T Wake]

<lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:V5RUg.8424$GR.5685@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:aoe7i21tk8sssrs4pk0ih2suo1b1k0gder@4ax.com...
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 18:23:50 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



T Wake wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message

I input: "This paté smells like cat shit."

and I got back: "Ce pâté sent comme la merde de chat."

How would you translate it?

I wouldn't. I'd just speak English very loudly and very slowly.

---
How brutal. If you didn't understand French and they spoke French to
you, very loudly and very slowly, would you understand what they
were trying to say?

How much sweeter to be able to softly crush an opponent with his own
tongue.


It was SATIRE, fer Chrissake. Sheesh, even I got that.

Something's don't translate into USENET very well. And while I have no rabid
dislike of Americans (I think every Englishman should keep one as a pet), I
notice a tendency for them to miss the subtler parts of British humour....

 

[Keith]

In article <eg0vov$s36$2@leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker@emory.edu
says...

In article <MPG.1f8db882374b5dc7989d6c@News.Individual.NET>,
Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
In article <eg0k2p$e61$1@leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker@emory.edu
says...
In article <MPG.1f8d91f2b6b5c0e8989d5f@News.Individual.NET>,
Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
In article <efugkv$4up$3@leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker@emory.edu
says...
In article <nrc5i2tq8jr4k99aqofmbbesm7em13ktok@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 18:28:11 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:


"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:eftptn$c8p$2@leto.cc.emory.edu...

Tell me how many times the Bill of Rights says "people" and how many
times
it
says "citizens."

SCOTUS has said that even visitors have the rights of citizens when it
come
to legal processes. After all, you expect their homeland laws to
apply
in
the US would you?



Correct. But they also realize that the rights apply only when those
people are physically in the USA. Which is why some bad guys are held
elsewhere.

John


Well, Bush thought Gitmo qualified as "elsewhere" but the USSC said no.
Then
he held people in Europe, which is raising a stink there. It might keep
some
prospective EU members out even.

Actually, no it didn't. It said only that Congress had some say in
the matter.

No, Bush claimed the detainees could not sue in US courts and the case
should
be dismissed. The USSC said they could, and heard the case. Not talking
about the way of trying them; talking about the right to sue.

No, it said that the Bush plan hadn't been authorized by congress,
but that they were free to do so.

---
Keith

No, Bush claimed the court didn't even have the right to hear the case
because they were held outside the US, at Gitmo. The USSC obviously
disagreed, as they heard the case.

They heard the case but the decision was that his plan couldn't go

forward without congressional approval. Pay attention.

BTW, the SCotUS is not superior to any other branch, or at least is
not supposed to be. They've been told before "with what army are
you going to enforce your decision".

--
Keith