Jihad needs scientists

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:07:32 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 21:54:47 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



John Larkin wrote:

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

A lot of this anti-US fervor started with Democrat Presidential
candidates trying out their sound bytes in 2002-2004 in Europe.

/BAH
OH BS. It started with Bush invading another nation.

Correct. I didn't really give a damn before.

Graham

So, seriously: why do you care now?

America is now threatening my way of life.


Bizarre. How?

John

Personally I'm glad we're making some progress in Eeyore's behalf...
maybe he'll decide to shut-up ;-)

...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.

 

[Eeyore]

Kurt Ullman wrote:

In article <4525758C.D1168AE5@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Not much since it would largely be gobbled by China and India
among others.

How would that happen ?
They are the fastest growing users of oil currently.

They can't *instantly* take it all though.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Kurt Ullman wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
Kurt Ullman wrote:

You suggested that we stop giving them reasons to hate us. From their
own rhetoric and statements, the only way we are going to get that
subset that hates to stop is to capitulate. Period.

No it isn't.
Gee apparently the Argument Clinic Sketch has broken out.. (g).

Why do you think that ?


Well the rhetoric of OBL and other Al_Queda honchoes. The writings and
rhetoric of radical sects in Saudi, the remnants of the Taliban the
pronouncements in public after the various attacks in Europe and Asia,
etc. I generally take people at their word when they say they will
continue to bomb until the US and the West are defeated and Islam rules
throughout the world. These are the guys that want to do is in and the
subset who hate us.

No such thing has been said.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

T Wake wrote:

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

In the UK when a nutcase kills someone, the press hound social services
("How could you let this happen") and inevitably some poor functionary
will get sacked as a scapegoat. However, the reality of the matter is the
nutter was the bad person and the _only_ person to blame.

Actually, in the case of UK social services I can readily believe that
policy was to blame in fact.

Really? The policy made the madman kill people? Wow. I never realised that.

You should see some of their 'policies' ! It's scary.

Graham

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 22:41:57 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 23:35:28 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 16:08:34 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
Homer J Simpson wrote:
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote

I don't think Clinton was a very good moral example, but then again, there
are lots of things that are worse than getting an adulterous blowjob at
work

Carter sold arms to the Indonesians so they could massacre the East
Timorese. Compared to that a blowjob is nothing.

Heck, even the UK sold arms to the Idonesians. Jet fighters in fact.

That the US public could get so worked up over a minor sexual indiscretion yet
not give a damn about killing tens of thousands of foreigners is very telling
and a very depressing comment on the state of US society.

---
You pay _way_ too much attention to the media.

I'm imagining Ken Starr ?

---
Without the media's turning Clinton's sexual indiscretions into a
cause célebre, the Lewinski matter would have remained private, as
it should have stayed.

I don't recall Starr being a newsman.

---
Who said he was?


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[T Wake]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:4atai2dh3runc46iqe0kplnqjmkica83i6@4ax.com...

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 21:36:01 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
newspa7i290tdd070i0c5tfhl8d8m6hdv0859@4ax.com...

For me, it would depend on the situation.

Really? I dont see how.

---
Well, nothing is always black and white, so it would depend on the
situation when the time came to make the choice. After all,
converting to a religion under duress isn't actually like embracing
it, it's just doing whatever has to be done to make sure you stay
alive so you can fight later on.

I agree to the extent that most things are rarely black and white. If a
public conversion would be such an easy thing for you to embrace, what would
be wrong with (for example) your country converting to Islam and living
under Sharia law.

Then the extremists would have little excuse to continue their attacks.

(Yes, simplistic, I know).

Ultimately, though,
without life I'd have _no_ way of life, so I think clinging to life
would win out.


Then convert to Islam and live the rest of your life happy and peaceful.

---
Who says so? My plan would be to convert so that I could work
against Islam from the inside. After all, the thinking behind
"convert or die" doesn't come from a philosophy I can abide, but if
I refused I'd have no way to try to cause its downfall.

Ok, fair point. However, if living another is the primary goal, then convert
and be peaceful is the answer. Each day you try to subvert the overlords
your life is in danger.

The way I see it, everyone dies in the end.

---
Yeah, but you don't have to throw away what you have left for no
reason but to spite someone.

True and I am not talking about throwing it away.

In our hypothetical example, the world has converted to Islam and all
nations are Sharia. I would not see the point in continuing to live as all I
lived for was gone.

On a less ludicrous note, we live in times were each day another small part
of our every day freedoms are taken away to make us safer. This is, to me,
totally unacceptable.

All I can do is try to ensure
those who live after me have the chances, freedoms and rights that I have
enjoyed. If I die sooner rather than later it makes no big difference in
the
grand picture of things.

---
You don't know that.

If you die sooner than later you might miss a grand opportunity,
working underground, to pass on to those following you a chance at
self-determination.

True and I see your point. However, if by showing I was never going to
sacrifice my personal beliefs no matter what the threat, then I may
encourage others to do so. Peaceful protests do work. (Jesus for example).

Isn't the saying something along the lines of "The man who sacrifices
freedom for life deserves neither and will have neither"? (or words to
that
effect).

---
It's more like "They who would give up essential liberty to purchase
a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." and
it's attributed to Benjamin Franklin.

Nice one - thanks.

 

[Eeyore]

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

The demented donkey doesn't realize that the increase in VD is mostly
in senior citizens living in age segregated communities like "The
Villages".

The rate in young ppl is on the rise too. The USA has one of the very worst records on this issue.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

T Wake wrote:

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

What does the USA get out of it ? Apart from terrorist attacks ?

Well, my personal feeling is that changing your foreign policy as the
result of terrorist attacks is _always_ wrong.

You'd be insane to ignore the reasons !

The US has recognised the right of the State of Israel to exist. Why should
they stop supporting them? Supporting Israel to simply get at the Arabs is
wrong, but why stop supporting an otherwise closely allied country?

The USA didn't give a shit about Israel until the 60s.

Graham

 

[T Wake]

"Homer J Simpson" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:MefVg.51669$E67.2161@clgrps13...

"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message
news:z8KdnXZUI_tF5rjYRVny2Q@pipex.net...

Nope. not good enough. If the call is suspect it can't wait a
"certain number of hours". The value is gone by the time they can
call a FISA judge.

No, nice try at a strawman, but it has nothing to do with what I'm
saying and what is provided for in FISA.

Strawman or not, the time sensitive nature of the intelligence still is
not a strong enough argument for most cases.

You don't seem to have any skill in comprehension whatsoever. All the FISA
court requires is that you report what you have done, not what you are
going to do. Bush doesn't want to do that because he is as crooked as
Nixon.

Sorry, you seem to have directed this post at me.

First off, as I am a UK citizen the FISA means less than nothing to me and
interests me about as much as slugs on lettuce leaves.

Secondly, and more importantly, my post says I do not care how time
sensitive the intelligence is. Saying the "int is vital and needs to be
actioned in the next five seconds" is ludicrous. 24 is not real.

By the time a telephone number is identified as intelligence bearing there
is sufficient time to get proper, advance, authority to intercept.

Feel free to try and explain what you think my post said.

 

[Eeyore]

T Wake wrote:

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

Graham was pooh-poohing Gordon's claim that there's a process going
on to end terrorism, and I was pointing out that Graham has no clue
about what's being done in secret, just like most of the rest of us.

You have to be mad to think "anything is going on in secret" except more
stupidity.

But you have no way of knowing that.

Why else would the USA be blundering from one failure to the next ?

Even the best plans fail.

And useless ones never stand a chance.

Graham

 

[T Wake]

<lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:TpfVg.8964$GR.4115@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...

"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message
news:z8KdnXZUI_tF5rjYRVny2Q@pipex.net...

lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:_kdVg.8930$GR.1926@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...

"Keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f8ef7a64499f172989d95@News.Individual.NET...

Nope. not good enough. If the call is suspect it can't wait a
"certain number of hours". The value is gone by the time they can
call a FISA judge.

No, nice try at a strawman, but it has nothing to do with what I'm
saying and what is provided for in FISA.

Strawman or not, the time sensitive nature of the intelligence still is
not a strong enough argument for most cases.

You better believe it is in this case.

Why?

What situation can the intelligence be so vital that the law enforcement
agency know it is going to be said but dont have time to advance request a
warrant?

However, it's provided for in FISA.

Not really relevant to me, as your country feels it can intercept my
communications at its leisure.

 

[Eeyore]

T Wake wrote:

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

In any case they'd have to overthrow EU and UK law first.

---
No big deal. You've never heard of martial law?

Martial Law can only be imposed by a conquering army or whatever.

Not true. Already in the UK the government have floated the idea of using
soldiers to provide police (RMP) in Garrison towns.

The surveillance team which assisted the shooting of the Brazillian were
partly military.

Soldiers and AFVs have deployed to Heathrow as security.

I don't recall any mention of Martial Law there.

Graham

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

T Wake wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:45257252.1B92CFF9@earthlink.net...
T Wake wrote:

Ouch. You cutting wit has shamed me. I do apologise.

However, as you feel able to invade our newsgroup with crossposted
bullshit
(and imply your rules are more acceptable) I must bow to your masterful
double standards.

Yawn.

If you spent less time trying to sling insults, you may get enough sleep to
read through a full post.

My sleep problems are medical, and not really of any importance to
you.

Based on the frank and honest response, I see it really is a case of you
having nothing better to defend your position than a collection of
logical
fallacies wrapped up in schoolground taunts.


Not true: I have NEVER taunted a schoolground.


Aha. Interesting take on the grammar. Well done. Keep up the good work.

--
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

 

[T Wake]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:45258A8C.CAB040C@hotmail.com...

T Wake wrote:

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

In the UK when a nutcase kills someone, the press hound social
services
("How could you let this happen") and inevitably some poor functionary
will get sacked as a scapegoat. However, the reality of the matter is
the
nutter was the bad person and the _only_ person to blame.

Actually, in the case of UK social services I can readily believe that
policy was to blame in fact.

Really? The policy made the madman kill people? Wow. I never realised
that.

You should see some of their 'policies' ! It's scary.

I can imagine. I dread to think what reading the "kill strangers" policy
will force me to do though.

 

[T Wake]

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4525817E.232F50F7@hotmail.com...

Homer J Simpson wrote:

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

Entertainingly, most of the comments seem to come from Americans.

I especially like this one:

"Agreed. Finally abstinance is being taught and encouraged in American
schools. Things are actually starting to look up morally here, at least
where I live. Girls who "fool around" are really looked down upon and
almost shunned in my school. Because of that we really don't have a
problem.

- Danny Dymarkowski, Archbold Ohio"

I am going to laugh about that for days.

No shit. No virgin ever did anything for me.

BTW, IIRC the abstinence only programs lead to a much higher rate of
abortions.

In any case, the girls who 'fool around' are only looked down on because
of
the fucked up atttiudes the parents are projecting.

God Bless Fundamentalists.....

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

T Wake wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:452571FE.EB618D6@earthlink.net...
T Wake wrote:

Really? What did Teacher set as the victory condition? This is USENET,
despite all the hard talk and macho strutting all people are doing is
typing
words. How can any one win or lose a "tauntfight" like that?


Endurance.


Aha. The mad, the unemployed, the social misfits, (and so on) are the
victors then. Wonderful.

Unemployed? Does 100% medical disability after a lifetime of had work
qualify?


--
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]

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Do you personally know anyone who doesn't carry some form of
identification?

What do you call a " form of identification " ?

It's not compulsory to carry a driving licence with you in the UK and I don't.

Graham

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 22:54:36 +0100, "T Wake"
<usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:i0a8i2hadjh1gfqs84iur3qj96t71fevm9@4ax.com...
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 16:29:32 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 00:42:54 +0100, 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.

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.

---
P.S. One Australian friend of mine says he'll be eternally grateful
to you for giving them Heaven and keeping Hell for yourselves.


Glad to hear it.

They have the rough end of the deal though - the sensible ones moved to New
Zealand.

---
I've never been there, but I'd like to go.

Everything about it seems beautiful.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

T Wake wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4525731F.88253EF2@earthlink.net...
T Wake wrote:

Good job he could stand on you to stay clear.


In your dreams.


Oddly, no. It may come as a shock but you, your head and turds (or any
combination) have never really played a big part in my dreams.

Is this all part of your dream sequences? Do you have trouble telling
reality from dream? From your yawning (and posts) it may be the case....

Actually, with my sleep problems I can't remember having had a dream
in almost 10 years. You do have your fun, though, don't you?


--
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

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 22:54:36 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Gordon wrote:

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 20:16:58 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
"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

Looking down the other end of the tunnel...it seems being passive
and compliant is a very sure way to lose an argument. Theodore
Roosevelt had things sorted out pretty well when he said, "Speak
softly and carry a big stick."

And the real trick is not to use it.

---
That would certainly have been to your detriment.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer