Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What percentage of Iraq has access to all these things you mention?John Fields wrote:
On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 19:26:06 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
John Fields wrote:
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
America really should have known better. The invasion pretty much
served no
purpose that waiting (say) five years wouldn't have missed out on.
---
Back then I think we were concerned with how much more money Saddam
Hussein could siphon from the humanitarian aid bucket and divert to
terrorist causes or squirrel away for his own use. Also, I think we
were more than a little angry about the impotence of the UN in being
able to conduct inspections on anything but Saddam Hussein's terms.
ISTR reading where the inspectors were often turned away from
inspection sites and told when they could come back to conduct the
inspection.
So to make up for it you bombed Iraq almost back to the stone age.
---
cite?
Electricity, running water, schools, hospitals and satellite tv is
almost back to the stone ages? What a fantasy world the donkey lives
in.
Dont patronise me in an effort to support your outlandish claims. I haveIn article <aYOdncO2G-VG6LTYRVny2g@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:gelii25rlsap6hjbq5g67fb3vfe57q7lrn@4ax.com...
On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 19:44:34 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
If you had your way, everybody would convert to Islam.
No, not even remotely. We would just stop going out of our way to do
the
things that we repeatedly do that piss off the rest of the world.
Using computers is a product of Western civilization. Are you
suggesting that all business stops using them? All TV shows
have human images in them. Are you going to stop watching TV
so the rest of the world won't get pissed off? All women have
to stay home. Are you going go get the groceries? No women
may have medical care. Are you going to deliver your own babies?
Are you willing to watch somebody you love die because she is not
allowed to go to the doctor nor the hospital?
What's that got to do with the above ?
---
Can't you figure it out?
Well, when I tried, all I could think was some one was very, very mistaken
about even the strictures of the Taliban's government.
I suggest that you talk to some women.
They are not the first, nor the last, country to demolish historicalThen recall the
destruction of ancient buddha images on a mountain.
So what? What did they do next? Pick up RPGs and attack the invaders?Then find out what the people of Afghanistan did first.
IIRC, they started playing music and got rid of a lot
of hair and opened shops.
The one you are talking about. I understand a fair bit about the realCan you explain it to me please?
Which characteristic of Islamic extremism do you not
understand?
Article in this weeks new scientist about this. People get caught up inKen Smith wrote:
In article <45298B1B.CC24AF11@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
Ken Smith wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
kensmith@green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) writes:
It nicely rebuts the claim that the warning of Pakistan was the
reason he [OBL] survived.
That's not the claim (not mine, at least). Just that the warning
of
Pakistan is an indication of lack of seriousness about the whole
affair.
What warning ?
When Mr. Bill sent missiles to blow up OBL a call was made to Pakistan
to
let them know that the missiles were not from India. IIRC, the
missiles
were in flight when the call was made.
And how does that affect the outcome wrt OBL ?
It didn't. In the fictionalized story they showed on ABC some time back
they had this as a plot element. Much like the rumor being started that
the russians had silent subs after "Hunt or Red October" got published,
some of the plot lines from that story have crept into the culture as
accepted fact.
Thanks for that explanation.
I cannot give you a web pointer. I have read more than 100 booksjmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg7tn5$8qk_005@s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
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.
No, I'm absolutely dead serious. This very assumption is a crux, if not
*the* crux, of this discussion. We have people going off all over the
place, speculating like mad about what the Middle Eastern Muslim culture is
and is not, and about what the terrorists' motivations really are. Unless
you grew up a Muslim in the Middle East, I'm not going to let you get away
with something this basic without evidence. My evidence, from talking to
Muslim acquaintances, coworkers, etc. I've had over the years, is that Islam
is a very peaceful religion. If this is true (and I have no reason to doubt
them, they had no reason to lie to me), then what is the "culture that
admires killing" of which you speak?
I have no intention to use that argument.And don't go quoting verses of the
Koran
Christianity is not a religion based on peace and life.to demonstrate that it is a "culture that admires killing"--there are
verses in the Bible that would make you believe that Christianity is an
equally violent culture. You and I know it is not--it is a culture that
admires peace and life.
I have absolutely no idea what you meant.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.
That was hyperbolic allegory.
No, that is why I highlighted the fact it was an "assumption."On Sun, 8 Oct 2006 23:12:29 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
When were Muslims a world power?
google "muslim empire" for the details.
I assume you are harping on about the Ottoman Empire.
Suggesting a google search is hardly harping on, and I mentioned no
empire by name.
I didn't Google search it. I made a judgement call on the most likelyNow, going back to the question, when were "Muslims" a world power. The
Ottoman empire was a Muslim empire, but not all Muslims were inside the
empire. The statement I was objecting to makes the (sadly common) mistake
of
treating "Muslims" as a single entity.
So write a letter of complaint to google.
How? Or is that just an automatic response you fall back on when you dontOn Sun, 8 Oct 2006 23:13:14 +0100, "T Wake"
usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> Gave us:
Wow. A new insult. Brilliant. Did you spend all weekend trying to come up
with that one or did you over hear some school children like you seem to
have done with all your others.
Again you show your utter stupidity.
Those three seconds must have felt like a lifetime for your one brain cellI posted the response three seconds after I read the retarded
bullshit that was spewed by the idiot.
No, they did nothing of the kind. They demonstrated their intent to destroySo 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.
Where do you *get* these assumptions???
What assumptions? Islamic extremists wish to kill me and mine?
They've told me so. Furthermore, their statements were not
empty threats; they demonstrated their intent.
And have you forgotten that Clinton kept them from attacking for 8 years,In article <bnPVg.11984$6S3.8593@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg806n$8qk_001@s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <KStVg.13889$7I1.2829@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
All we've done in Iraq is create one big, huge problem that, luckily for
Bush, *he* won't even have to deal with. I will grant you that Bush
dealt
with 9/11 reasonably well--but what evidence do you have that Clinton
wouldn't have done just as well
Because he didn't do as well. You seem to keep forgetting that
9/11 was the SECOND bombing of those building. The first one
happened while Clinton was president and he did not deal with
the problem. He just gestures and pretended it won't happen again.
Evidence, please. This is revisionist history, filtered through a desire
to
exalt Bush and excoriate Clinton. How about a little more balanced view
of
the facts, please.
You have forgotten that 9/11 was the second attempt to destroy
the World Trade Towers?
In article <Fn7Wg.3184$NE6.2374@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:egak0r$8qk_001@s779.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
In article <aQPVg.14037$7I1.13536@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>,
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eg81lv$8qk_001@s968.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...
This party is 100% ignoring the problem. All I want is to
start thinking and talking out loud about it. Their national
chairman actually thinks that replying to questions about
this problem with a "Trust me" is a sufficient answer.
I'm starting to doubt your ability to not filter everything through the
Republican talking points,
I don't listen to them. How many times do I have to pound that
into your ASCII eyesite?
....and you can't even be honest with yourself about what you're doing.
As a
middle-of-the-road independent, you are about the most extreme Republican
apologist I've yet "met".
Curious. The fear is so deep-rooted that the only
way you can read what I'm writing is to force my
thoughts into the box that can only obey and ape
one particular male that happens to be President at
the moment.
WahhabiIt seems like every country has its own brand of Islam established
by its ruler. Each ruler functions by promising to become the
head of all Islam. I understand this; politicians do this
all the time when they discover that nobody can be satisfied
ever.
The Saudis call theirs ...shit...the word begins with a W and
the only word that pops up into my head is Wannabe.
/BAH
And yet more assumptions.... While this may be a slightly more soundIn article <N6WdnRy5c-iGQLrYnZ2dnUVZ8sydnZ2d@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
Really? The president of Iran has declared it is the intention of his
country to kill millions? Could you point me in the direction of an
example
of this please
Where do you think their atomic bombs will be detonated?
You're absurd.Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
ISTR that Bin Laden's next goal is to kill 3 million people
Cite ?
I don't have one since I can't access the web.
That's a copout. How about any recollection at all of where you saw it,
so
others can try to verify?
The time was around 2004. It was a site that translates that
news issued in Arabian. The essay counted 3,000,000 Arabs
who had been killed by the US since 1500s and 3 million
Americans would have to die to make things equal.
You're saying that "a site" threatened 3 million Americans ?
How feeble minded are you ?
Fortunately, not as feeble as you are.
The evidence is completely the reverse of your suggestion.Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
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.
In 500 years Islam will have 'grown up'.
They are at the age that Christianity was in the 1500s.
I've been studying that era. Assuming (this is a big
assumption) that religions follow similar growing paths,
take the same time for each growing pain, there is going
to be quite a bit of mess before things gets settled down.
I expect that modern global communications / media and living in each
others' cultures will speed up the growing process very considerably.
Actually, I think it stops maturing.
The best argument you have is an old Bible story ?Go read about the tower
of Babel and how nobody got anything done.
So ?I've got a new
hypothesis about this one. When you go to work and nobody
shuts up, nothing gets done.
Hollow answer with no content since you simply can't supply a realEeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
If the mindset of the religious extremists are not changed and
they become successful in destroying Western civilization.......
How could they even begin to acheive this ?
You will help. I'm not make any specifications here just in
case someone hasn't thought of it.
Well, you might consider doing so; it's not all that difficult. TurnsI didn't Google search it. I made a judgement call on the most likely
result. It was not Google who used it in context in the debate though.
I disagree--I think most Western nations view those rights as (to use a wordMy biggest issue with the UK government at the moment stems on the way we
are throwing away rights and freedoms I grew up to take for granted
(possibly part of the problem).
I agree. Thoughout human history, appealing to fear and anger has provenSome of it is done in the name of "National Security" which really does
annoy me.
I'm not sure I understand--can you give some examples? I tend to supportSome of it is done in an insane move to appear to be "liberal" and
"multicultural."
And thus my comments about the broken political process. It would appearStill, it isn't just the current government which is entirely to blame.
All the political parties are close enough that nothing will change.
Yep, that's the thing we should *really* be afraid of and fighting against.No, but I can think of several that have fallen apart because their
government became corrupt and eroded peoples' rights all in the name of
keeping power when they should not have been able to.
Pretty much the main cause of Empires collapsing.
Like how ?lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote
Because this intent to destroy all traces of Western civilization
is not isolated to one human being.
Where do you *get* these assumptions???
What assumptions? Islamic extremists wish to kill me and mine?
They've told me so.
Why do you listen only to threats - especially when these threats come from aFurthermore, their statements were not
empty threats; they demonstrated their intent. Any other
pronouncements are to be taken seriously and not dismissed as
bluster.
Just go to another store! That's what I do.If your grocery store carries only one kind of apple, it
doesn't matter how many other vareities you want if it
is the only store carrying apples. The only way you can
get him to carry the variety you want is to convince him.
This is called changing his mindset. Until you do that,
there is no other option available to you for getting
the apple you want.
I don't know how to deal with someone who feels threatened by a website !Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
The time was around 2004. It was a site that translates that
news issued in Arabian. The essay counted 3,000,000 Arabs
who had been killed by the US since 1500s and 3 million
Americans would have to die to make things equal.
You're saying that "a site" threatened 3 million Americans ?
How feeble minded are you ?
I don't know how to deal with this kind of illogical thinking.
I suspect you mean Wahabi. An unrepresentative bunch of loonies along with the"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
Most Islamic states in existence now do not conform to any of the things you
have described. What I can assume is that you have taken the "demands" of a
few firebrand clerics as indicative of the desires of _all_ extremist
groups.
There is (based on the suggested responses) also the apparent implication
that this desire is shared by Islamic states themselves. This is not far
from assuming the ranting of a demented Christian cleric is indicative of
the desires of America.
It seems like every country has its own brand of Islam established
by its ruler. Each ruler functions by promising to become the
head of all Islam. I understand this; politicians do this
all the time when they discover that nobody can be satisfied
ever.
The Saudis call theirs ...shit...the word begins with a W and
the only word that pops up into my head is Wannabe.