Jihad needs scientists

[Eeyore]

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

That said, you are nitpicking in the same manner. More than ten times as
many people die every year as died as a result of the 11 Sep 01 attack. That
is TEN attacks of that scale (and that was a large scale attack by anyone's
standards) every single year. Year in, year out and accepted as a normal
risk in life.

Amazing really.

So much for mess prevention. So how many people does Bin Laden
have to kill before you deal with this problem? 300,000?
3,000,000? 300,000,000? A billion?

What makes you think any of the above are even remotely possible ?

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
JoeBloe wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
JoeBloe <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

Essentially a stupid jerk is all he amounts to.

Let him be one. He is merely doing the popular action in
blaming the US to assuage his fear.

I have no fear of these issues. It's the damn Americans who are afraid
you clot !

America hating blind bastard. That's all you are, ass, and why does
it smell like unkempt livestock in here?

It's what Bush has done to America that's horrible. It's brought the very
worst out in eveyone there. It was fine under Clinton.

No. It was not fine at all.

It looked a heck of a lot better to me and least he was an intelligent and
articulate man, something that could never be said of Bush.

So you prefer people who can spin you a line of bullshit to
people who deal with real problems?

Bush is easily 100% worse in both of those respects.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

You can't accept that Islam isn't a threat to your lifestyle ?

Not only is it a threat, but it has already begun to
alter my lifestyle. My goal is to ensure that it
alter 100% of my lifestyle, if I'm allowed to exist.

Tell me more about this threat you perceive.

What exactly is it that you're afraid of ?

Loss of enough knowledge of how to do things that it will
take another 1000 years to reinvent the wheel.

Are you actually serious ?

That bogeyman really has got to be very big indeed.

Graham

 

[YD]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:00:39 GMT, <lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

YD wrote:

Positively so. All you have left is posing as powerful know-it-alls on
the internet.

You're going to have to stop trimming so much, so we can tell which group of
powerful know-it-alls you're talking about. Sometimes it's really hard to
tell the players without a scorecard.

Eric Lucas

Don't blame me, it was already trimmed.

- YD.
--
Remove HAT if replying by mail.

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 23:51:37 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 23:11:29 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" wrote:
"Gordon" <gordonlr@DELETEswbell.net> wrote

Where did the current terrorism financing and materials come
from?

From the USA (oil). Unlike most every other conflict, the US is paying for
both sides in this one.

---
I've always thought it would be interesting to see what would happen
if the US sent troops to, say, Honduras to protect them from
Guatemala and to Nicaragua to protect them from Costa Rica, and then
Honduras and Nicaragua decided to declare war on each other.

All you ever think of is war.

---
Wrong again. But, this thread seems to be devoted to it, so what's
wrong with a little fantasy what-if?


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[YD]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 03:53:32 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

YD wrote:

Positively so. All you have left is posing as powerful know-it-alls on
the internet.

Ever tried to figure what you look like to those outside of your tight
little circle of cronies?


What's wrong? Did your only "friend" blow out his brains to get away
from you? I am 100% disabled, but it doesn't keep me stuck at home. I
can still do some work, some days so I do volunteer work to help other
disabled people in my area. You, on the other hand are always bitter,
and trying to slam anyone who has a clue.

Clue to what, exactly? This far all you have done is rant about
exterminating everything outside US borders.

- YD.

--
Remove HAT if replying by mail.

 

[Eeyore]

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
John Fields wrote:
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 00:00:18 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
T Wake wrote:

The hearts and minds with the population did the trick.

As it has often done for the British Army but the US version has fucked that
up for sure.

---
You're talking about a bygone era where we both shared winning
hearts and minds.

This is now, where the rules are a little different. Are you making
any friends in Iraq that we aren't? You do still have a presence
there, don't you?

We were doing quite well initially actually until the actions of US forces ended
up with us all being tarred with the same brush.

Quite why we think of you lot as an 'ally' is almost beyond me.

---
Me too. The relationship is more like that between a vibrant young
man and old, doddering parents.

Young guys are often clueless and that's my assessment of your situation. There's
nothing doddering about the UK either. That's another mistake youngsters often make.

Graham

 

[JoeBloe]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 02:58:42 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
<nobody@nowhere.com> Gave us:

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:fucbi29sjnq3iiboi57rpd4hifvsemhmjc@4ax.com...

Jay Leno: "Which two countries border the United States?"

Girl on the Street: "Ummm, errr, ahhh, Europe and ummm, Paris?"

Yep, that's an American all right. Like those who think Alaska is an
island.


Do you actually think that it was unrehearsed and not intentional,
dumbass?

Obviously it was unrehearsed. Apparently you can't tell the difference
between fact and fiction. Since you clearly can't tell your ass from a hole
in the ground that doesn't surprise anyone.

Idiot! When Leno goes out on the street, it is NOT *DURING* his
show it is prior to it, and the sessions last for hours, and yes
rehearsed bits get filmed, and then the editing department puts
together a little piece for the show. You really can't be that
stupid, can you?

 

[Eeyore]

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
Homer J Simpson wrote:
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message

I'm saying that if someone threatens their fundamental freedoms, the
British public will defend them.

Hopefully.

I grow less and less sure of this as I watch public debate each day.

A mistake Hitler made. He read reports of pacifist debates in the UK and
assumed they were a guide to the lack of response to be expected during an
attack on Britain.

The British Air Force response showed him the error of his ways.

The Royal Air Force to be entirely accurate but yes, we were certainly far
from unready. In fact Britain's armaments industry had been working hard in
the years preceding WW2 to make the planes ( and other stuff ) we knew we
were going to need.

---
And yet, had we not come to your rescue, you'd be dog meat today.

A ridiculous idea. We won the Battle of Britain and Germany knew it couldn't
invade without air superiority.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

JoeBloe wrote:

Every legitimate post made to Usenet contains the sender's IP addy

Not true.

Graham

 

[JoeBloe]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 03:06:03 GMT, <lucasea@sbcglobal.net> Gave us:

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:regbi2dpkrf103e4opion58ooto1lmft2c@4ax.com...

It is you, fuckhead, that is incredulous.

Yes, I suspect it is he who is incredulous at your idiocy. I think the word
you wanted is "incredible", as in "not credible".

No. It was said just fine.

Nothing you say carries any credence either.
>

 

[JoeBloe]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:42:27 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

JoeBloe wrote:

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

What do you think about the Vincennes shooting down an Iranian Airbus then ?

Successful missile test?

How about proof of American sailors being trigger happy dickheads ?

The simple fact that you can make a joke out of the mass slaughter of innocent ppl
is one reason why the rest of the world looks at the USA in incredulity.

911

It is you, fuckhead, that is incredulous.

I know.

You *know* nothing.

It's only when Americans get killed you get mad.

Idiot! They were mostly foreigners in the building, let alone the
hardware (computer servers) that got nailed. You seem clueless even
as to the name of the buildings now. The US folk that were killed
were mostly the passengers of the planes as well as the ER crews that
were killed.

You seem to have never seen the responses to the crime by other
nation's speakers. I remember them quite distinctly.

You're quite happy for the USN to kill innocent foreigners by the planeload and it
doesn't even 'register on your radar' does it ?

WTF are you mumbling about? Where are we "killing innocent
foreigners by the plane load"?

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 23:55:57 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

T Wake wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote

Israel can only 'win' by erasing Lebanon.

Is that what you want ?

What alternative do they have? Until the Palestinians and Arabs can accept
Israel's existence, Israel can not hold off on its defensive posture.

Do you advocate Israel surrender?

Many Arab nations have sorted this one out. We really do need to bash the
Israeli and Palestinian heads together.

---
This from a person who professes not to advocate violence.
---

Whilst Israel continues to get a blank cheque from the USA it's not going to
happen of course.

---
Why should it? We like Israel and would like to see a peaceful
resolution to the Hatfield and McCoy problem over there but, by the
same token, if we abandon her she'll most likely be destroyed.

So, instead of your solution, which is throwing her to the wolves,
I'd prefer we spend as much time and money as it takes to
,hopefully, eventually find the answer to the riddle and bring the
hostilities to an end.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[JoeBloe]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 11:37:24 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

Homer J Simpson wrote:

"Kurt Ullman" <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote

25% of world production?

So you are really assuming our use is going to go to nothing?

The US still produces quite a lot of oil. Add in Canada, Mexico and the Gulf
and you're close to what you need IF you had halfway fuel efficient cars.

It would help even more if US diesel fuel was clean enough that modern Japanese and
European diesel cars could run on it. The fuel efficiency of these is very good
indeed.

You're an idiot!

Now you claim that we don't know how to make diesel fuel?

Your US hate thing has really gotten the best of whatever you may
have once been.

You are surely no scientist.

 

[JoeBloe]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 11:54:29 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
Homer J Simpson wrote:
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message

I'm saying that if someone threatens their fundamental freedoms, the
British public will defend them.

Hopefully.

I grow less and less sure of this as I watch public debate each day.

A mistake Hitler made. He read reports of pacifist debates in the UK and
assumed they were a guide to the lack of response to be expected during an
attack on Britain.

The British Air Force response showed him the error of his ways.

The Royal Air Force to be entirely accurate but yes, we were certainly far
from unready. In fact Britain's armaments industry had been working hard in
the years preceding WW2 to make the planes ( and other stuff ) we knew we
were going to need.

---
And yet, had we not come to your rescue, you'd be dog meat today.

A ridiculous idea. We won the Battle of Britain and Germany knew it couldn't
invade without air superiority.

All of Europe would have been toast without us... including you,
chump.

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 00:17:08 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

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

If westerners are more concerned with staying alive than having their
freedoms eventually they will convert and the conflict will end.

Why would they ever convert and why do you even consider that this is what
it's about ?

Because this is the simplistic example.

They would convert because, as the example said, they are more concerned
with staying alive than remaining free.

You wouldn't catch me doing it. I believe in the right to practice no religion
at all !

---
They don't, so you'd be dead, silly boy.

Since it's not going to happen it's hypothetical.

---
So what? This entire argument is hypothetical, so if you buy the
premise you buy the bit.

If you dislike being in hypothetical space why do you even bother to
show your ugly faces?


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 00:24:49 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

Eeyore<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
Homer J Simpson wrote:
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote

Alternatively you could put every mosque under armed guard and provide
them with no end of support....

Or move them all to the Outer Hebrides - and the Muslims with them!

With such a wide selection to choose from, I often wonder why we have no
prison islands.

---
You do. It's called Australia.

Bwahahaahahah.


You could make the prisoners actually work the land and stuff.
You never know, it might do them good.

---
They certainly seem to be doing better than you lot, lately.

With an entire continent they could hardly do worse could they ?

---
Sure they could.
---

Wasn't there
some other place we colonised that was a continent too ?

---
Yeah, but the difference is that you sent your undesirables away
from where they came from, while we sent ours back to where they
came from.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

In article
<kurtullman-B34E7E.08145006102006@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx>,
Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:

In article <eg56e4$8ss_004@s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

In article
kurtullman-0F836F.10021405102006@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx>,
Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <w88Vg.9105$vJ2.869@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:


To consider those real issues but to call the abuse of minors by a
Congressman "a smokescreen" is about as disingenuous as politics gets.

Define abuse, (seriously). I usually reserve that term for actual
physical contact (sexual, assaultive) and (so far at least) there is
nothing to indicate that either happened. Although I am the first to
suggest that the possibility it did happen is much more likely given
both the history of abuse and behaviors that got him into trouble.
Talkin' dirty is illegal, but I still say it is a couple orders of
magnitude below physical and sexual abuse.

When did talking dirty become illegal?

/BAH

Talking dirty to those under 18 using electronic means such as
instant messaging and e-mails is illegal. (Due to a recently passed
federal law). Now you happy (grin)?

Goodfuckinggrief. Does this law include newsgroups? And what
are boys who are suffering from newly infected testosterone
poisoning going to do? Is it also illegal for them to
talk about sex among themselves?


/BAH

 

In article <452633ED.B02A967A@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

another possibility is
the goal is to cede to these extremists

Are you really that monumentally stupid ?

Listening to their greivances isn't 'ceding' btw.

Arafat used this tactic. He kept people at the table talking
about peace to give his side time to accumulate weapons. He
even got all these rich countries to fund his efforts.

You're suggesting that because one person did this then we must never
again listen ? That's a very blinkered view indeed.

It is a tactic that worked. Don't you think others will try
the same thing if it succeeds in fooling all of the Democrats
all of the time?

You can't change attitudes with bullets.

My attitude changed. And the trigger was two little airplane
missles.

/BAH

 

In article <45263511.774BF7DA@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

You can't accept that Islam isn't a threat to your lifestyle ?

Not only is it a threat, but it has already begun to
alter my lifestyle. My goal is to ensure that it
alter 100% of my lifestyle, if I'm allowed to exist.

Tell me more about this threat you perceive.

What exactly is it that you're afraid of ?

Loss of enough knowledge of how to do things that it will
take another 1000 years to reinvent the wheel.

Are you actually serious ?

Yes. I'm working on a 1000 year scenario and trying to shortcut
the cold start so that it will only be 500 years.

That bogeyman really has got to be very big indeed.

Perhaps you should reexamine your assumptions.

/BAH