Jihad needs scientists

[Robert Latest]

On 2006-10-06, John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

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

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.

I don't know where that moral imperative would come from, but
what the US are learning at the moment is that (military) power
alone doesn't seem to be the right way to accomplish much in the
way of spreading democracy.

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.

I agree, but that is only because democracy is all I know from a
personal experience.

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.

OK.

"Run down by a bunch of religious goons" isn't very friendly,
either.

That's indeed unfriendly, but is obviously directed against the
current American government. If I were anti-american I should
enjoy watching the US government doing such a poor job, shouldn't
I?

Someone even mentioned "a great deal of the alienation the US
are experiencing at the moment" recently.

Poor choice of words on my part. "Alienation" can indeed include
hostility which is not what I meant. I meant it in the literal
sense of "becoming a stranger to former friends".

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.

But how naive ist that? Europe always had strong and friendly
ties to the US -- economically, and above all, culturally. Much
of the US's population back then was (and still is today) of
first- or second-generation European descent. Europeans,
particularly Germans, were and still are great fans of American
literature, film, and music. The US were seen as a powerful and
morally integre friend that was doing a genuine and successful
effort in helping to rebuild Germany. I myself can't quite
understand how the Germans -- after the Kaiserreich, the not very
successful and brief Weimar Republic and 12 years of fascist
dictatorship -- could so quickly, eagerly and successfully build
and adjust to one of the most advanced democratic systems. But
they did because of their strong historical and genetic ties to
the Western Allies.

Trying to transplant that model on a country or region whose
relationship to the US is based on mutual misunderstanding,
language and cultural barriers, and indifference by starting (not
getting dragged into) a war for doctored-up reasons can only
fail. Which could have been foreseen (or understod in
hindsight) by anybody with half a brain. Naive isn't a strong
enough word for it.

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.

See above. The attempt was based on lies, which is something that
people -- at least Europeans -- deeply resent, even if the cause
itself is honourable. And given the long experience that
Europeans have with wars, like you yourself have noted, they knew
damn well that "C'mon, let's go spread some democracy for the
camel jockeys" just isn't going to work.

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.

But wel all -- Europeans and Americans alike -- live so damn well
with all the nice things we let the African people get cheated
out of, don't you think?

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*.

The Europeans are anything but insular; in fact they are trying
to solve global problems on a broad consensual basis. It's (among
very vew others) the US that is actively thwarting those
attempts. Th UN and Kyoto are but two examples.

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

Indeed. And that's a very shaky basis on which to start wars, for
example.

robert

 

[T Wake]

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:h4vdi2pirt4mfuodh1gio6hcogajs2ht0h@4ax.com...

On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 20:15:33 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> Gave us:


"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:asgbi2psl68cmdgjb3b726o4qo6h4eokdm@4ax.com...
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 20:55:46 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:



Keith wrote:

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

Well, I'd like to have a few less crapolas posts so I can find
the ones were posted by thoughtful people.

Yet another American dismisses non-American thing thinking as crap.

All you seem to do is post lines like this. You have no dialog
just a gut reaction that happens to be deemed to be politically
correct at the moment.

Yep! /BAH, this is the stuffed donkey. Stuffed donkey, this is
/BAH. The stuffed donky is one of SED's most prominent (and least
useful) anti-American Europeons.

If a stuffed donkey can outhink most Americans it doesn't say much for
America does it ?

You're stuffed? Got any video, or is that too advanced for an ass
like you?

I figure if we saw the real you, you'd instantly make more kill
files, and the group might finally be rid of your stupid ass.

So why don't you kill file him? Are you waiting for other people to do it
so
you can copy them?

Shut up, retard boy.

That cutting wit is brilliant. Did you take lessons or are you naturally
this funny?

 

[T Wake]

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:f7vdi2pcfgnpdem7c3d1auv1jujf9dmald@4ax.com...

On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 20:21:48 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> Gave us:


"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:vgdci29a8p13kfhhs2i6rnm9b36duq7r72@4ax.com...
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.

Ooh, such a big word. Did you have to look it up? Bet you had a little lie
down afterwards, didn't you?

I'd bet that I used the word many more years ago than you ever did,
and in these groups too.

Well, maybe in SED but I bet you didn't in sci.physics. Also, I bet I used
it before you did, more importantly I bet I used it in its proper context
before you first did.

 

[T Wake]

"JoeBloe" <joebloe@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:l5vdi2lvneofr8ug993t476pbqc2c89jo9@4ax.com...

On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 20:20:54 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> Gave us:

What happened on the 9th of November?


You're an idiot.

Is 9th November "you're an idiot day?"

Wow. You must really love it. Do people buy you presents as well?

 

In article <mEtVg.13881$7I1.4141@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>,
<lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg56eh$8ss_005@s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <w88Vg.9105$vJ2.869@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Did you find the speech that Bush made in January? He described
why Iraq is important.

I saw it when he gave it.

Now go read it. That way you may be able to avoid your instant
conclusions.

I saw nothing there but more of the usual
fear-mongering that he has been doing all along.

Then we are talking about different speeches. The one
I heard described why Iraq was important.

However, I agree at this
point that we need to not "run away", since we created the mess for
absolutely no reason. We need to make a plan to stabilize the situation as
best possible, and then get the hell out of there and let them duke it out.
It's now essentially a full-blown civil war,

No, it's not.

and we have no business keeping
our nose in the middle of it.


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

Did you purposely mininterpret what I wrote? Or did I not
write clearly enough? The Democrats are using this behavior
as a distraction.

A "smokescreen" is the same as a "distraction".


Do you not think that they are minimizing
the behaviour?

No, but you are by calling it a smokescreen.

Candidates can spend most of their speech time talking about
this. Voters never get a chance to hear what they think
about any other issue, especially national security.

Nobody has reported what those emails said.
All I've heard is that there was sex mentioned. Does that
mean he wrote, "Fuck" or something else?

When his own party gets up in arms about it, calls it "reprehensible, etc.,
I gotta believe it was pretty bad.

That's because they are not stupid. Anybody who could think knew
this would be used by the Democrats who were running for office.

It has been said he propositioned sex in
the emails,

I have not heard that on any news report. So where did you hear
it said that he did?

and the only thing that wasn't clear was whether or not he
followed up on the proposition. (At this point, I assume he didn't, because
that's his Constitutional right to be considered innocent until proven
guilty, but the proposition itself is bad enough.) To assume he did nothing
more than say the word "fuck" is denialism.

What do you call instantly assuming that he propositioned pages
for sex?

/BAH

 

[Y.Porat]

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

T Wake wrote:

Don't you have some circuit boards to play with?


I don't play with them, I either repair them, or scrap them. They go
into free computers that are given away to other disabled Veterans. I
am on usenet on another computer while I work on the donated computers,
when I can 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
------------------------------

dont beleive a single word of T.Wake
he is a disturbed gangster and a pathologic lier

and a 'PHD of cosmology'
so let him speak about
thje influence of cosmologic radiation- on the balls of the goat

Y.Porat
-----------------------------------

 

[T Wake]

"Y.Porat" <maporat@012.net.il> wrote in message
news:1160214389.832663.225030@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
T Wake wrote:

Don't you have some circuit boards to play with?


I don't play with them, I either repair them, or scrap them. They go
into free computers that are given away to other disabled Veterans. I
am on usenet on another computer while I work on the donated computers,
when I can 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
------------------------------
dont beleive a single word of T.Wake

I suspect the dont.

he is a disturbed gangster and a pathologic lier

And you are still stalking me. Were you upset I was ignoring your nonsense
in other threads?

and a 'PHD of cosmology'
so let him speak about
thje influence of cosmologic radiation- on the balls of the goat

Well, sadly, you are a good example of how Jews are not all intelligent.

 

In article <wMGdnU0OlJ5E6rvYnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

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.

After reading your response and the others', there is no way
anybody can do mess prevention until one is made and is too
big to clean up.

/BAH

 

In article <zuWdnToy_6qB6rvYRVnytA@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

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?

Those people have not acquired an instant gratification addiction.
They think in terms of decades and centuries. Arafat got billions
of dollars by talking peace while actually doing the opposite.

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.

Apparently.

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.

Not little missles. Clinton lobbed a couple of little missles and
it didn't stop them. These people do not care who nor how many
die. It is their stated goal to kill millions.

/BAH

 

In article <4526B105.12FC91D9@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:

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?

So you're not going to listen to anyone you disagree with ?

My, you certainly do have a habit of leaping from one premise
into a orthogonal conclusion.

/BAH

 

In article <6ruVg.13907$7I1.7585@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>,
<lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg5el9$8qk_011@s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <452634AB.3341D603@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

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 ?

They
were brought in a culture that admires killing; I wasn't.

Again, evidence to justify this assumption?

You have got to be kidding.

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.

I haven't seen anybody (who is rational) demand that all Muslims
be killed. I have seen extrapolations about what will have to
be done if no mess prvention is done now.

/BAH

 

In article <4526BF7C.6F4F23DC@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

lucasea@sbcglobal.net wrote:

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

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

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 ?

They were brought in a culture that admires killing; I wasn't.

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.

Ironic isn't it ?

Not at all. Your posts about no evidence is beyond belief.

/BAH

 

In article <P6-dnSajh_Dt4LvYnZ2dnUVZ8qudnZ2d@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg5el9$8qk_011@s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <452634AB.3341D603@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:


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 ?

Because I can think of one that will kill a billion in less
than 1/2 year. If I can think it, they certainly can. They
were brought in a culture that admires killing; I wasn't.

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.

I understand what makes more sense to you. I was brought up to
take action if I can see that a big mess is about to be made
if nothing is done.

I still think this is a difference between males and females.

/BAH

 

In article <eg5tpm$70s$13@leto.cc.emory.edu>,
lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:

In article <eg57l7$8ss_011@s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
In article <P4Kdnb9ApIGR47jYRVnyrw@pipex.net>,
"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.

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?


So why aren't we devoting all our resources to getting him?

Because this intent to destroy all traces of Western civilization
is not isolated to one human being.

/BAH

 

In article <hABVg.65$45.191@news.uchicago.edu>,
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:

In article <eg586e$8ss_014@s831.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:
In article <MPG.1f8ef2658cd2dcf4989d8d@News.Individual.NET>,
Keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
In article <eg335h$5l0$10@leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker@emory.edu
says...
In article <eg2od9$8qk_004@s829.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
In article <VAVUg.13310$7I1.3298@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:452415BE.DB0DBC1E@hotmail.com...


Keith wrote:

rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...

And you think you can defeat 'radical Islam' with bombs and
bullets
?

I know there is no choice. Perhaps you want to submit?

There is no need to 'submit'

You're living in a perversely stupid fantasy paranoid world.

It comes from the constant bombardment by Bush's fear-mongering--it's
his
way of keeping power over people.

I think you should start to listen to Bush instead of listening
to other people supposedly repeating what Bush said. I would
suggest you start with his January, 2006 TV speech.

People start to lose perspective on what
is happening and why. It really is a very powerful narcotic.

People can also lose perspective if they assume that Bush
is always wrong

So what has he been right about?

and is the cause of all ills which is the
only thing you hear from his political opposition.

This causes a lot of people to overlook the fact that these
same politicians do not intend to deal with the threat
to the nation.


Bush has increased the threat. His own NIE says so.

You're in a fantasy land. ONE SENTENCE of the NIE report was
leaked by the Democrats to try to discredit Bush. The four pages
around that one sentence, later released, say exactly the opposite.
Please get your "news" from someone other than Franken.

Thanks. I did not know this.

The fact that the NYT, (who released the leak in the first place)
suddenly became very quiet on the topic, should've been a pointer.

Oh, I figured there was something fishy; I simply didn't know
the genus of the fish.

/BAH

 

In article <sPGdnWtqqOyR7LrYRVnyrw@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:sfGVg.11940$6S3.1257@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...

"Ken Smith" <kensmith@green.rahul.net> wrote in message
news:eg72kt$a4m$4@blue.rahul.net...

When you go to war against a country, you
bomb its capital regardless of how large of a land mass the country
covers.

That would be great, but the terrorists aren't a country, and there is no
capital.

This is (IMHO) the oddest thing about the jingoism over the "war on terror."
People keep talking about bombing and invading, yet the list of countries
which would have to be bombed / invaded is ludicrous.

I had 12 countries on my list. Somalia is apparently starting
to deal with its problems on its own, now that the Cold War
is out of their back yard. Libya is acting a bit better.
I've heard rumors that Saudi Arabia is beginning a little bit.
I don't get much information from the fUSSR sections.

/BAH

 

[T Wake]

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg7t54$8qk_003@s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

In article <zuWdnToy_6qB6rvYRVnytA@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
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?

Those people have not acquired an instant gratification addiction.
They think in terms of decades and centuries.

So sying it "worked" is inappropriate, "working" is as much as you can
assume. Even then it is tenuous as the working / not working argument has
equal support.

Arafat got billions
of dollars by talking peace while actually doing the opposite.

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.

Apparently.

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.

Not little missles. Clinton lobbed a couple of little missles and
it didn't stop them. These people do not care who nor how many
die. It is their stated goal to kill millions.

Who is this they of which you speak?

 

[T Wake]

<jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg7ss6$8qk_002@s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

In article <wMGdnU0OlJ5E6rvYnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

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.

After reading your response and the others', there is no way
anybody can do mess prevention until one is made and is too
big to clean up.

Your mess prevention analogy is flawed on several levels. The invasion of
Iraq is not "mess prevention."

 

[JoeBloe]

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 20:45:29 +0100, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> Gave us:

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 12:53:57 -0300, YD <ydtechHAT@techie.com> wrote:

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 08:37:41 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

Sheeesh! Do a Google-groups search on Eeyore/Graham... he's a
depraved poster to porn groups, so he's probably in a cell, posting
from the prison library ;-)

...Jim Thompson

PPOSTFU

- YD.

Several lurkers here have done the same Google-group search and
verified it. So do it yourself. ESAD ;-)

...Jim Thompson

How sad are you ?

Post the results man !

You're an idiot. The results are apparent every time you post, boy.

 

[JoeBloe]

On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:50:57 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> Gave us:

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?

True. Even the janitors must access classified labs to empty the
trash bins.

He's the guy out on the street corner, flipping the big arrow sign
around that says "We Make Anthrax Here"