Jihad needs scientists

[Michael A. Terrell]

Robert Baer wrote:

Try wasting bandwidth on this...

Alzheimer's acting up again? ;-)


--
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]

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:fu8bi2h0pfrimp5kfqphg8g8ner12tb8vg@4ax.com...

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 11:54:41 -0400, Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> Gave us:

In article <HLVUg.13315$7I1.5654@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net says...

"Keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f8dd485be8e903f989d78@News.Individual.NET...
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.

I don't care. If you're listening to a phone call to which the phone in
my
living room is party, then as a citizen of the US, I demand that your
listening be carried out according to my Constitutional rights.

Your "demands" are silly.

ESPECIALLY in time of war.

Hahaha. You are in a war against a concept, which by definition will never
end. Brilliant.

When the other end of the line is in a
mosque in Iran (number captured on a &bad_guy's_laptop), I _demand_
that your call be intercepted.

As do I.

I demand you be detained as a possible risk to society. I feel your idiotic
approach will provide support and succor to the enemy.

See, everyone can make demands.

Your "Constitutional rights" have
nothing to do with it.

Right again! Fun time is over, till we get this shit band of
scimitar wielding idiots wiped out.

Inbreeding is a terrible thing.

 

[T Wake]

"Kurt Ullman" <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kurtullman-826474.11145206102006@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx...

In article <eg5l1f$sig$1@blue.rahul.net>,
kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote:

In article <fu8bi2h0pfrimp5kfqphg8g8ner12tb8vg@4ax.com>,
JoeBloe <joebloe@nosuchplace.org> wrote:
[...]
ESPECIALLY in time of war.


No, no .... are we at war! When did this war get declared? I must have
missed the debate in congress and the vote. When was it? What country
is
our enemy?

You musta. Congress has passed judgement on the war in general and the
one specific to Iraq many times when funding it, authorizing the
original incursions into both Afghan and Iraq, etc. etc. etc.

What is the endstate for War in Iraq? The occupation has dismantled the
previous government and it's military. The terrorists operating there are a
post-invasion creation.

Are you also implying that a War in Iraq justifies withdrawing
constitutional rights in CONUS?

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 20:28:26 +0100, "T Wake"
<usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:kce8i2l54rst8l51d8ekjq7iopiiq6530l@4ax.com...
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 19:49:49 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:8ft5i211dol6qj0uqbuo75l7bsr01uf60v@4ax.com...

---
Sometimes a crude allegory serves admirably in making a point
quickly.


On both sides of the debate....

---
Yes, but often the point made by the side with the crude allegory
overshadows the implicit admonition against political incorrectness
enjoyed, silently, by the other side.

Fair one and (IMHO) neither are really valid debating styles. If people want
to throw insults at each other, great. I have no problem with that.

That is, if that's what you had in mind.

I am not sure what I had in mind.

If it isn't, and both sides revert to crude allegory, then the
psycholgy underlying the symbology can get very interesting.

Yes, although it does imply that both sides of the debate are somewhat
fixated with inserting things up their own backsides..........

Interesting symbology but, based on the mental picture I have of the
"average" person on USENET, not pleasant....

---
LOL, nor was it intended to be!

What I was alluding to was that domination might not seem to be so
bad if it occurs a little at a time.

Anyway, I think that's what I was alluding to. Seems like that was
a long time ago and I'm starting to lose track...


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Kurt Ullman]

In article <4aqdndORSPk_6LvYRVny3g@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

"Kurt Ullman" <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kurtullman-826474.11145206102006@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx..
.
In article <eg5l1f$sig$1@blue.rahul.net>,
kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote:

In article <fu8bi2h0pfrimp5kfqphg8g8ner12tb8vg@4ax.com>,
JoeBloe <joebloe@nosuchplace.org> wrote:
[...]
ESPECIALLY in time of war.


No, no .... are we at war! When did this war get declared? I must have
missed the debate in congress and the vote. When was it? What country
is
our enemy?

You musta. Congress has passed judgement on the war in general and the
one specific to Iraq many times when funding it, authorizing the
original incursions into both Afghan and Iraq, etc. etc. etc.

What is the endstate for War in Iraq? The occupation has dismantled the
previous government and it's military. The terrorists operating there are a
post-invasion creation.

And this is even remotely revelant to the question of the war
getting declared, how?

Are you also implying that a War in Iraq justifies withdrawing
constitutional rights in CONUS?
Nope. Said nothin' about that either way because the question I

was responding to wasn't on that particular topic.

 

[T Wake]

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4525CE02.456E30F6@earthlink.net...

T Wake wrote:

I don't have to. Your country can intercept other nations to gather
foreign
intelligence.


Unless you are a terrorist, what are you worried about?

Interesting argument.

I work in corporate security and often work for governmental organisations,
will you please surrender to me all your bank records so I can check what
transactions take place. I also want you to record your movements and
actions at all times.

I am sure, that as you are not a terrorist, you will have no qualms against
this.

I await the data.

 

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:hnhci25s8879f2fi1pm8st27hbud8um1co@4ax.com...

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 00:52:47 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



lucasea@sbcglobal.net wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote
On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 23:00:23 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote:

So what? If push comes to shove we'll beat the shit out of them too,
whether they're popular or not, dumbass.

Beat the shit out of whom exactly ?

Whoever chooses to launch an attack on us or our friends or chooses
to make it seem like an attack from them is imminent. Or, maybe, as
you'd like to believe, just because they piss us off.

How exactly does Iraq fit into this justification for beating the crap
out
of somebody?

It doesn't of course.

---
Sure it does. AIUI, Saddam Hussein was violating, with impunity,
all of the UN sanctions that had been placed on Iraq, including
stealing the money that was supposed to have been used for
humanitarian purposes. Eventually the time finally came when we
decided that he needed to be made accountable, so we went after him.

That's a BS rationalization. Castro has been doing exactly the same thing
for 50 years, as have a lot of other evil dictators. We don't go around
bullying their countries and bombing them back to the stone ages. Iraq did
nothing to the US, Iraq was not *going* to do anything to the US (they had
zero capability, and were demonstrably developing zero capability), thanks
to the first Gulf War, and we invaded for no good reason. You're just like
Bush--you can't admit a mistake. Actually, I think Bush did subsequently
admit it was a mistake. You still can't.

And found him. Not like a proud soldier willing to give his life
for Allah and the jihad, but like a coward in a rathole.

All that proves is that he wasn't a threat to anybody except the rat
(actually, it was a spider).

Just because none were found doesn't mean their precursors or
finished weapons weren't moved before we got there.

Not one shred of evidence was ever presented that he had any such thing.
And radioactive materials *do* leave evidence of their presence, no matter
how careful you are and no matter how carefully you clean up. If they were
there, we would now know it with absolute certainty. To assume they were
there just because we didn't see them is akin to believing in the Boogeyman
under your bed, and is just a rationalization to justify Bush's
fear-mongering...and you've bought into it.

It was a preemptive offensive strike.

Pre-empting what, exactly, peace and the absence of terrorists in Iraq? If
that was the goal, it succeeded grandly.

More's the reason for attacking them when they're weak; you can be
sure of a win, you can destroy their capability to strengthen their
military, and you can minimize the loss of human life in the
conflict.

So let's attack the Bahamas. I hear they're pretty weak, and I guarantee we
will find exactly as much evidence of the presence or development of weapons
there as we did in Iraq.

Eric Lucas

 

[T Wake]

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg5e55$8qk_007@s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

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.

Is it? Has Israel ceased to exist now?

Don't you think others will try
the same thing if it succeeds in fooling all of the Democrats
all of the time?

Logical fallacy.

You can't change attitudes with bullets.

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

Yet, you think doing the same to the other side will change their attitude
in a different manner? Ok, that makes sense.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 03:48:40 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:

According to my doctor, I am fine other than the medical problems.
No insanity, never had any problems with 95% of the people I've met.

OTOH, morons like the one who was blowing his horn and cursing at me
for walking too slow across a marked crosswalk while using my cane do
piss me off, as it should be. I had one punk try to take my cane away.
I wound his arm behind his back so tight he was begging for me to let
him go. I may be 100% disabled, but I'm no easy target. ;-)

Have you seen the movie, "Falling Down" ?

No, not yet. BTW, I found a website showing an easy way to put a
rapier blade inside a hollow cane. If someone grabs the staff, they save
you the trouble of pulling it off. Do you think I'd have to actually use
it, or would they run away looking for clean underwear?

I've also considered a tiny inverter and battery in the handle with
some nice copper inlay in the staff to deliver a couple hundred volts at
20 "Hurts" per second. I built one 40 years ago that burnt out a 110
volt 15 watt bulb when i tested it from a six volt lantern battery.
Think what I can do with a bunch of nicads or nimh. ;-)


--
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]

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg56q0$8ss_006@s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

In article <45253DEE.896AC21A@earthlink.net>,
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Sure. That's local politics and wonderful to use as smoke and
mirrors to distract your attention from the real threats.

/BAH


Local? I guess you don't keep up with the news.

All politics is local. The subject we were talking about
is national security. If the Democrats, who are campaigning
for office, talk about dirty words in emails when they meet
with their voters, they don't have to describe what they
are going to do about the national threat.

What national threat?

Do you mean the Islamic based terrorist who cause almost insignifcant loss
of life when compared to (for example) obesity?

The one running
for governor here keeps harping about what our current governor
didn't do. However, when asked what would he have done, he
leaves the meeting.

It's a tactic not to address the issue of the threats to our
national security.

The counter tactic is to over exaggerate the threat from one sector to mask
other problems.

 

[John Larkin]

On 6 Oct 2006 07:18:41 GMT, Robert Latest <boblatest@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:58:29 -0700,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote
in Msg. <gchai2ligb29uejo28rjrpi78fkdonglhp@4ax.com

But I consider trerrorism to be attacking non-combattant populations
for political/emotional/morale reasons, which both sides did in WWII
and I don't think the US is doing deliberately at present.

At present, no. Deliberately, no. It is in fact difficult to make out
what the US are doing at present, and why they insist on doing it.

The theory is, I think, that the US has the power and the moral
imperative to spread democracy throughout the world. You can argue
that it's in our self-interest to do so, but I could reply that it's
in everybody's self-interest. Whether the goal is being pursued
intelligently or effectively is certainly open to debate.

That's what causes a great deal of the alienation the US are
experiencing at the moment. The uproar about slippery email exchanges
between a politican and teenagers isn't helping the US to get into a
situation where they can be taken serious, either. In any normal country
the guy would simply be kicked out of office, tars and feathers and all
and be done with it.

It's political fodder for the upcoming elections. US party dynamics is
very different for coalition-based governments.

The Cold War certainly helped hold western Europe together, and
supressed the latent anti-Americanism until the Soviet empire
collapsed and the Europeans felt they didn't need us any more.

I really don't know where you see all that anti-Americansim.

Um, this newsgroup? "Americans are fat idiots" sounds a bit anti to
me. "Run down by a bunch of religious goons" isn't very friendly,
either. Someone even mentioned "a great deal of the alienation the US
are experiencing at the moment" recently.

The
dominant sentiment among Europeans (including myself) is a huge
disappointment with what America has grown into recently. For much of
the world, especially Europe, America used to be the very definition of
freedom - not the least because it saved Western Europe not so much from
Hitler as from Soviet domination.

One could argue that the US is trying to do for the Middle East what
it successfully did for Europe, and for the same reasons. What I don't
understand is why so many Europeans are so upset that the attempt is
being made. This, I think, turns out to be a deepish issue.

Now we have to witness how that great
country is being run down by a bunch of religious goons and their
industry buddies. The feeling is more like grief, not hate.

There is some disappointment here that Europe, now free from the big
bad bear, is not taking a more effective role in its former colonies
in Africa, where people are unnecessarily dying by the millions. It
looks almost as though Europe, in its criticism of US actions and the
lack of action on its own part, has become uncaring and insular,
saying "leave it to the UN" knowing full well that the UN does mostly
nothing. And criticizing the US for *trying*.

Given the chaos of causality over time, it's impossible to say what
the longterm consequences of our actions, or inactions, may be.

John

 

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4525D7F9.458A1C6C@earthlink.net...

lucasea@sbcglobal.net wrote:

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:t1dbi2pob3u7ic3dp19guns746jria0n2e@4ax.com...
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 18:29:00 GMT, "Homer J Simpson"
nobody@nowhere.com> Gave us:

importing oil to feed its ridiculous fleet of
inefficient cars

I doubt that you even have any clue as to the model and make
distribution of cars in the US population.

Over half are SUVs and pickup trucks, that all get less than about 17
mpg.
I think that's all he really needs to know to make statements like he did
about "ridiculous fleet of inefficient cars".

Not around here. More small cars than anything else. Sure a lot of
people drive pickup trucks, but they have business names painted on
them. I drive a mini pickup with a four cylinder to do my volunteer
work, and because its all I have at the moment.

Not nationally representative, but interesting.

It all changes when the Northerners come to winter here. Lots of
Caddies, Lincolns, and SUVs driving down the center of two lanes at 20
miles an hour under the speed limit.

Yeah, I hate Ohio drivers, too.

Eric Lucas

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

YD wrote:

You obviously have way too much time on your hands to hang out on
usenet.

Its where the trolls are, and well, you know, its always open season
on trolls. No limit! ;-)

You also seem to spend a lot of tme on usenet, as well.


--
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 Larkin]

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:38:56 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On 05 Oct 2006 23:43:02 GMT, "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@aon.at
wrote:

I think you can count up to two, or three. At four you have actualley
stucked, as many other .... unfortunately.


Who is it now? The world leader... Rusia? USA? Europe?


No, no wait... it's the Moonstation Captain speaking to you... brzzz,
breeek, pam. USA - is - the - World - Moon - Leader -.

WhY? just look to the weird people there, buying claims on the moon. I
believe you could defent taht claims, but that shows even more that the
pure moron is found in the United States of America.



Best regards,

Daniel Mandic

Daniel,

Whereas I admire your determination to converse with other engineers
(you are an engineer, aren't you?) in what is obviously not your
native tongue, you really ought to know that your writing makes no
sense at all.

John

The above made perfect sense to me and it was actually very funny.

Graham

Would you then assist us by kindly providing translations?

John

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

YD wrote:

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

You really do have reading comprehension problems 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

 

[T Wake]

"Ken Smith" <kensmith@green.rahul.net> wrote in message
news:eg5og7$hr$4@blue.rahul.net...

In article <AAfVg.63$45.130@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu> wrote:
[...]
Lobbing missiles in the general direction (with a forewarning to
Pakistan) is not an "attempt to get OBL", just an attempt to show that
"something is being done".

"Hello Pakistan. There is a missle about to come over. It is one of ours
and not from India ....(WOOOOSH)... have a nice day"

It was a lot better than the risk of starting a war between two nations
with nukes. The amount of warning would have only been enough if they had
OBL on speed dial.

Always possible......

 

[T Wake]

"Homer J Simpson" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:6piVg.51772$E67.11129@clgrps13...

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:452408AA.F58E3945@hotmail.com...

Your American Love of Violence is once again nnoted.

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

Isn't it the message of almost all US made movies?

Great isn't it. Movies are brilliant. Sadly some people get a bit confused
about what is a movie and what is reality.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

YD wrote:

No, just poking fun at another Amerika uber Alles dickhead.

I guess that it takes one dickhead to know another. Do you guys have
a secret handshake and pay dues like other clubs?


--
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 Thu, 05 Oct 2006 20:43:44 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

What we want is an economically competitive planet with all nations
at peace and capable of determining their own futures.
Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be everyone's goal.
Fortunately, we're the cops.

No. You're the playground bullies.

---
No, were the ones who go after the playground bullies so that you
can have a safe playground.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[T Wake]

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:j9gbi2djdge48ltvdqqgectrur5tdkjcv9@4ax.com...

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 20:45:17 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> Gave us:


"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:ums9i2lpttd3bcqks34ufl2n0tpnl6856i@4ax.com...
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 21:48:37 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> Gave us:

...are part of
the great Islamic quest for world domination....



What is so great about it?

Learn reading and comprehension. Great does not always mean "good."

It isn't "large" either, dumbass.

Very true. There are even more reasons.

Alexander the Great was neither Good, nor Large.

Did you eat some of the pages in your dictionary?

Do not presume that I was unaware of the word's definition, you
fucktard schmuck.

Well, you still seem to be confused over the matter.

Try some more insults if it makes the voices in your head happier. Do they
reward you when you burn things?

Regardless of what it was meant to mean, it accomplished neither.

Again, there are more than two uses for the term. There are also numerous
uses under the guise of satire. I am sure when the throbbing in your temples
subsides you will learn to count to a large enough number and be able to
stop eating pages in your dictionary.

It also went right over your head.

Probably. Gibberish tends to.