Jihad needs scientists

[Lloyd Parker]

In article
<kurtullman-826474.11145206102006@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx>,
Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:

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.

But the constitution mentions war as a power of Congress thusly: "to declare
war." Not "to imply war."

 

[Lloyd Parker]

In article
<kurtullman-C56BCA.11171106102006@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx>,
Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:

In article <n3mci2p9ah579tq4d38b7emv85ksafipu1@4ax.com>,
John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:


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

---
From:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/3/newsid_4678000/4678707
.stm

"The USS Vincennes had tracked the plane electronically and warned
it to keep away. When it did not the ship fired two surface-to-air
missiles, at least one of which hit the airliner."

I think the airplane's pilot should have had the good sense to heed
the Vincennes' warning.

It is sorta the height of moral equivalancy to suggest that an
accident that we attempted to avoid by warning the plane is anywhere
near the same as anything else being discussed.

Further, there is no indication the pilot (1) was monitoring the frequency
used or (2) knew they were referring to his aircraft, as it was in a standard
commercial travel lane.

 

[Lloyd Parker]

In article
<kurtullman-3B55D3.12034306102006@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx>,
Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:

In article <W%uVg.13914$7I1.8882@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> 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.


...and yet, funnily enough, was *has* never been declared.

I can argue that point if you would care to. The Congress passed
a specific (actually a coupla specific) authorizations under the
requirements of the War Powers Act (an artifact of VN). Article 1,
section 8, para outlines the power of Congress to declare war (among
other things).

Which they haven't done since 1941.

Para 18 of the same Article gives Congress the power "to
make all laws whcih shall be necessary and proper to for carrying into
execution the aforementioned powers..." Thus the War Powers Act can be
argued to be the method Congress chose to declare war and thus it has
been done.

Except the act was passed once decades ago and did not declare war on Iraq.

It has always been interesting to me that no one has pushed this
Act through the Courts. I guess everybody is happy with it and doesn't
want to rock the boat for when their time comes back around.

 

[Lloyd Parker]

In article
<kurtullman-4CDB3C.12183406102006@customer-201-125-217-207.uninet.net.mx>,
Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> wrote:

In article <eg5rop$70s$4@leto.cc.emory.edu>,
lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:


Didn't. If the American is CALLING France, warrants are still needed,
even under the Bush statement. When calls originate OUTSIDE the country
and just come, then Bush says they don't need warrants. This is backed
up by current law, more or less.

Which law is that?


Case law. See below. This has been in place at least since my
training in the mid-70s.

If there is a legal tap on Goomba 1,
then if Goomba 2 calls G1, anything G2 says is usable against G2,
because the tap was legal.
In this case, when calls originate outside the US, there are no
requirements for warrant. Thus, if Terrorist 1 calls Terrorist 2 in
Pakistan it is legal. If T1 calls T3 in Newark it is also legal.
If one phone is legally tapped any calls to or from that phone are
fair game.

The issue is "domestic wiretapping" though.
Which was illustrated by Goomba one and two. As in Mafia type
one and two. One side is legal, then what is heard either way is okay.
Actually we are talking international wiretapping. Domestic by
most definitions remains inside the US. In this case the tapped phone is
outside the US. The US phone isn't tapped. But when someone from the
tapped phone calls or is called then the conversation is probably legal.

There isn't "tapping" anyway. The NSA monitors phone calls. ALL phone calls.
Computers flag those with certain words or phrases, or certain voices, or
certain locales, etc. But we have no way of knowing which things cause calls
to get flagged, nor do we have any assurance nobody is looking at the others.

That's why a judge declared the whole program unconstitutional a couple of
weeks ago (just stayed by an appeals court pending appeal).

 

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:jv0di2dodu8386be3ldi9h4a7mlqnebi8o@4ax.com...

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 21:20:18 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:



John Fields wrote:

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

That's very hypothetical but I reckon I'd fight against any tyranny
suppressing important freedoms.

Aha, you only defend "Important" freedoms. Ok.

It was meant to be emphasis about *fighting*.

---
Busted!!!

If it was, you would have written:

"That's very hypothetical but I reckon I'd fight against any tyranny
suppressing freedom."

So ?

---
You make a distinction between "important" freedoms and whatever's
left over, which must be the "non-important freedoms."

Which ones would those be?

Well, judging from the behavior of the current Administration, the right to
freedom from unlawful searches and seizures, the right to due process, the
right to only have to fight wars actually declared by Congress. Shall I
list more?

Eric Lucas

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

T Wake wrote:

"Homer J Simpson" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message

They banned the hell out of lawn darts - for sure.


Phew. Good job. Might have some one's eye out....

You think that is worse that the kids that died from them?


<http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2004-04,GGLD:en&q=lawn+darts+death>

--
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, 5 Oct 2006 22:50:02 +0100, "T Wake"
<usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:qkrai2hvpp43t4lpu1ttca9tpq8ueb94qr@4ax.com...
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:03:17 GMT, <lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Which one would that be, the dangers of driving on the nation's highways?
That's at least 3 orders of magnitude greater of a real threat to every
person in the country than is terrorism.

3000 people died at the WTC. Three orders of magnitude from that is 3
million. We kill about 40K people a year in car accidents.


3000 people (not all of whom were US citizens) have been killed by Islamic
terrorist attacks on the Mainland US in (shall we say 80 years). How many
have died in car accidents in that time?

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.

---
I really don't think that's fair.

In the case of 9/11, a premeditated series of events was set into
play which killed thousands of people, never mind the monetary loss.

In the case of traffic deaths, those are accidents. They result in
lives lost numbering in the tens of thousands annually, but they're
still "just" accidents.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

lucasea@sbcglobal.net wrote:

Again, evidence to justify this assumption? All the Muslims I know are very
much peace-loving people. Certainly much more so than any of the "kill 'em
all" Americans I see on this group.

You've got us all wrong, dingbat. I don't care about people who
behave themselves but if they want a fight, their life is going to be at
risk.


--
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 22:17:32 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

My reference to not speaking English as a first language was a
euphemism for being conquered, which was related to an earlier post
by Graham stating that had the US not become involved in WW2,
England and Germany might have teamed up to fight Russia after
Germany double-crossed Russia. In my opinion that would have been
suicide for England, as depleted as it would have been, when Russia
came rolling in to get Germany.

It wouldn't just have been Britain and Germany you clot !

---
Then you should have been more precise with your description. Lord
knows you expect everyone else to be!



--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

T Wake wrote:

I can think about space aliens invading and making everyone die their hair
red. Doesn't mean it is going to happen.

You can deal with things you _think_ will happen or deal with things which
are happening.

I know which makes more sense to me.

Die their hair red? When hair dies, its white, or light gray. You
need a new foil beanie, you're obsessing about malevolent aliens 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

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

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. ;-)


--
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

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

John Fields wrote:

Hell, we can make a joke out of anything, even a sad little donkey
like you.

Its no fun though, since he's better at making a joke out of himself
than we are when doing it for him.


--
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 23:03:20 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

Do you know when the next strike is going to occur and who the
perpetrators will be?

No-ordinary person does although our police here seem to be on the case.
That's their job.

---
See? That's part of the behind-the-scenes work that they do that
keeps that crap from happening. The "secret" work that you
pooh-poohed as 'madness'.

The part that makes it difficult is that when nothing happens it
makes it seem like nothing's being done, and you condemn the effort
you can't even see.
---

Of course if we weren't attacking Islam worldwide chances
are it would all simply go away.

---
Chances are, maybe, it might be, possibly, blah, blah, blah.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

lucasea@sbcglobal.net wrote:

"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

Why do you think I left Ohio almost 20 years ago?


--
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 23:07:36 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Fields wrote:

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

The USA is the most two-faced nation on the planet. You regularly back one side then
declare war on them.

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

Show me an example of this two-facedness.

---
OK.

On one face you say there's no violent rhetoric in your posts and on
the other you call for the destruction of Israel.

No I haven't.

Show me where I did.

---
Trust me.


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[T Wake]

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:n3hbi2t6cgbhv45958p3tgd8o2snitarrh@4ax.com...

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 20:59:52 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> Gave us:


lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:6d%Ug.9902$e66.1245@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...

"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message
news:tOmdnf6_-qawlbnYRVnyiw@pipex.net...

"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.

Yes, let's do stick to getting offended by the *ex*plicit insults.
There
are way more than enough of those in this thread to go around.

Yes. Easier to not get offended by anything here

It's really difficult to accomplish though, as you keep returning :-]

Aha, and you are forced to read my message how exactly?

I am fairly sure Forte Agent has filters.

 

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:uq5di25h88s74o4gi0du8ak3gunhpm1rth@4ax.com...

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 22:50:02 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:


"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
message
news:qkrai2hvpp43t4lpu1ttca9tpq8ueb94qr@4ax.com...
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:03:17 GMT, <lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Which one would that be, the dangers of driving on the nation's
highways?
That's at least 3 orders of magnitude greater of a real threat to every
person in the country than is terrorism.

3000 people died at the WTC. Three orders of magnitude from that is 3
million. We kill about 40K people a year in car accidents.


3000 people (not all of whom were US citizens) have been killed by Islamic
terrorist attacks on the Mainland US in (shall we say 80 years). How many
have died in car accidents in that time?

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.

---
I really don't think that's fair.

In the case of 9/11, a premeditated series of events was set into
play which killed thousands of people, never mind the monetary loss.

In the case of traffic deaths, those are accidents. They result in
lives lost numbering in the tens of thousands annually, but they're
still "just" accidents.

Who really cares...the victims are still just as dead. Semantic games is
all that is.

Eric Lucas

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Jim Thompson wrote:

No one east of Missouri knows how to drive ;-)

You would have trouble driving some of the roads I was on in Alaska.
If you drove like you do in the desert, you would have killed yourself
in a couple days, tops.


--
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

 

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:45269A59.D97F35DC@earthlink.net...

lucasea@sbcglobal.net wrote:

Again, evidence to justify this assumption? All the Muslims I know are
very
much peace-loving people. Certainly much more so than any of the "kill
'em
all" Americans I see on this group.


You've got us all wrong, dingbat. I don't care about people who
behave themselves but if they want a fight, their life is going to be at
risk.

I don't have anybody wrong, I take people at their word. The assertion,
which you've chosen to snip from my post, was that Muslims are raised in (I
believe these were the words used) a "culture of violence". There are
wackos that come from any culture, even ours, but that doesn't make it a
"culture of violence". And my *empirical* evidence is directly to the
contrary--it is a peaceful culture.

Eric Lucas

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 23:10:34 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) 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.

Actually, it started with FDR invading another nation. France,
specifically.

You're being very very silly.

Graham

I don't think so. A couple of things are at work here. One is the
military and cultural and technological and scientific dominance of
the USA as compared to Europe, which is bound to cause some
resentment. The other is expressed in the Chinese proverb, "if you
save someone's life, they will hate you forever."

You really are monumentally stupid.

Maybe we could change our maps to call the USA 'stupidland' instead ?

---
Sounds like fun. We'll change ours to call the UK "Untied Kookdom"


--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer