Jihad needs scientists

[unsettled]

T Wake dsitorts as only a Muslim can:

jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ehd5ug$8qk_010@s884.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

In article <45378D92.1903B626@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:


jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:


lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:


They gave their 95% confidence interval.

The news said that the questions that were asked was if
anybody knew anybody who died. Adding these up will not
give a correct count.

The 'news' was wrong then.

In most cases ( ~90 % ) a death certificate was shown.

And the death certificates said that all the deaths were
due to US killing them?


What has the US killing them being the cause of death got to do with
anything? Have you read the posts you are replying to?

If the US attacks destroyed a water pipe and someone died from drinking
polluted water, what would the cause of death be recorded as?

The study looked at numbers and rates of deaths. Since the US-led occupation
both have gone up. Is that an indicator of causal forces? You are now
heading into the argument that unless every death was the result of a _US_
soldier it had nothing to do with the occupation. This is nonsense.

Where is the record of lives saved by our presence? What about
the medicines and medical care and the food we've been providing?

 

[unsettled]

T Wake distorts as only a Muslim can:

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:a8a9c$453a3a5b$49ecfae$4118@DIALUPUSA.NET...

Eeyore wrote:


jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:



I know I do not write clear enough for all values of IQs.


Mine's 152.

What's yours ?


You're good at taking IQ tests. Doesn't actually
mean you're "smart."

You are a funny guy.

That too, but it doesn't negate my comment above.

I have realised you are a Left Wing plant to try and
discredit the Right Wingers in this thread. Well done.

This is very good. The more confused you and your
brothers are the better for me.

 

[unsettled]

T Wake distorts as only a Muslim can:

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:7433b$453a35b5$49ecfae$3982@DIALUPUSA.NET...

Eeyore wrote:


unsettled wrote:



Eeyore wrote:


unsettled wrote:


T Wake wrote:



If the West changed to Islamic based societies life would

continue largely as normal.

Normal in Islamic based societies is brothers killing
brothers in religious fanaticism, thank you very much!


No it isn't.

This sort of denial is meaningless.


It's definitely as valid as your daft assertion !




I was used to
hearing it from very young school children who
didn't like the facts they were denying byt had
absolutely no grounds for argument.

It is obvious you have no knowledge of history.


Au contaire, my knowldege of history is very good.




Brother killing brother was not stopped by
conversion to Islam. It remains prevalent in
the culture.


OK then. Cite please.

google islam killing 8,370,000 hits (arguments both ways)


http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=christian+killing

17,300,000 hits.

Is there a point to your post?

Sure, he asked for a cite about brother killing brother,
so I gave him a URL to follow. Now you've tried to turn
it into a dicksize war. Goody for you. Mindless followers
like you will be sidetracked. Thanks!

 

[unsettled]

T Wake dsitorts as only a Muslim can:

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:85443$453a3c1c$49ecfae$4118@DIALUPUSA.NET...

Eeyore wrote:


jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:



What is really frustrating about these people is that
they don't have to know any history.


I reckon in any competition, my knowledge of history would knock yours
into the proverbial cocked hat.


History has two distinct parts:

1) Knowledge of facts

2) Understanding historical facts in context

You lose.

Lose what? All you did was write two sentences. There is _no_ indication
based on the posts in this thread that you or BAH are able to carry out both
the points you mentioned.

BAH manages part of the time. I manage most of the time.

So, in reality, you lose. Thanks for playing.

Try again soon.

Your followers will love this. Glad to be of service,
strengthening their resolve to follow you since you're
a weak force. Lol

 

[unsettled]

T Wake wrote:

<snip>

 

[unsettled]

T Wake wrote:

<snip>

 

[unsettled]

T Wake wrote:

<snip>

 

[MooseFET]

T Wake wrote:

[... democrats ...]

They don't talk about what measures they will take to prevent alien
attacks

If we imagine that they have some ideas, we can also see reasons why
they may not want the other side to hear of them.

Also a great deal has been said about the risk of something nasty
coming in in a cargo container. Democrats have suggested better
inspection as part of the answer to this so it isn't true that they
haven't said anything. Unfortunately, the inspection needs to happen
at the shipping end not the recieving. The ports are places you
wouldn't want a nuke to go off.

 

[T Wake]

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:c387f$453a4078$49ecfae$4299@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ehd3gi$8qk_007@s884.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

The regular people were not allowed to watch a soccer match
(TV shows human images which is not allowed in Islam). Now
the regular people are starting to say no to these extremists.

Which is why there is very little to fear from extremism.

I give you all of WW2 and both the Soviet and the Nazi
extremism. Socio-political extremist movements are
to be feared and destroyed at the earliest possible
stage.

Yet you allow, and encourage, capitalist extremism to prosper. Extremism
flourishes where fear and ignorance exist. You are fanning the flames of
extremism, and feel that _your_ extremisim is acceptable as long as it
combats _their_ extremism.

In Turky, with 98% of the population being Moslem, they watch TV.

There are very strong movements in Turkey to ditch the
secular government in order to replace it with a
fundamentalist Muslim one. One of the things that's
kept that from happening is the US involvement in
Afghanistan and Iraq.

Also, one of the motivators for the fundamentalist movements is the US-led
operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. The independance the Kurds have as a
result of the US-led regime change has caused even more problems for the
Turkish government.

Everything cuts both ways.

Again, not true. Culture has flourished in Europe since at least 3000BC.
Europe has only been a Christianised region since around AD1000.

Start here: http://ctlibrary.com/3730

Are you trying to imply that the Christianisation of the Roman Empire made
Europe a Christianised region? If so, you are sadly mistaken.

Europe is bigger than Italy and parts of France. Even at the time of
Constantine the whole empire didn't convert. It was long after the break up
of the western Empire that the Germanic and Scandinavian tribes converted.
Or dont they count?

Up until around AD1700, Europe was dominated (in a loose sense of the
word) by Christianity but since then it has been on the wane.

DOA

Are you implying that those 700 years of Christian ascendancy outweigh
the other 4300 years?

Of course they do. Just how well do you remember your first
lover compared to the current one

Incorrect analogy. Not to mention, the current lover would be Atheist not
Christian.

(assmuing, out of the blue,
that in real life you might actually be enough of an actor to
be lovable

Your nation is led by a President who is overtly seek guidance from God.

See what I mean about assumptions about "first language" based
on a few posts?

Not my assumption. Please, do try to keep track of who says what. I am more
than aware of typos and spelling errors which take place and have not
corrected any of BAHs English as far as I can recall.

But, please, continue to make assumptions about who is posting what.

That would frighten me.

Seeking guidance is a euphamism for introspection while
bringing to the fore one's entire value system.

Well, this is purely down to interpretation. If I said I was seeking
guidance from my wife, it would not imply introspection. It is possible to
justify lots of things by claiming euphemisms.

The fact
that you make this into something sinister clearly demonstrates
your personal absence of what we call a "soul."

The UK PM is a devout Catholic. That offends me,

So if he's not an athiest ort a Muslim you're offended?

The UK is a protestant nation. If he isnt, it offends me. If he makes
secular judgement calls based on his religious view point it offends me.

Once again the personal metric triumphs over sanity
and logic!

Once again assumption and preconcived viewpoints triumphs over logic and
debate.

but at least we are not a super power and there are
(currently) significant checks and balances to prevent
a religious upsurge.

See how you are! You don't want a Christian religious
upsurge in your country, but a Muslim one would be OK!

Now where did you make this assumption?

Now I understand. You're a Muslim or a MUslim shill.

No, as always, you don't understand. You live with assumptions and
McCarthy-esque claims and assertions.

 

[T Wake]

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:c82fa$453a411d$49ecfae$4310@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake wrote:


I actually go out of my way to try and comprehend your point of view. You
obviously choose not to show me the same courtesy and, when your
standpoint becomes untenable, you fall back on accusing me of deliberate
misunderstanding.

Well done.

She's right. You're a Muslim or a Muslim shill.

Nonsense. But keep making your assumptions based on whatever you want to
make up

That being said,
you're so brainwashed your "truths" are limited to what you've
been "carefully taught." (see _South Pacific_)

Your idiocy overwhelms me.

 

[unsettled]

T Wake distorts as only a Muslim can:

<snip>

The argument in this thread is that the current
plans were wrong.

That's one of many many arguments in this thread.

It appears that the military chain of command
are coming to think that as well.

It is election season and the republicans are in
trouble there. Even you should be at least aware
that promises made during election season are not
to be believed. But then, you'd have no case to
make at all, so have at it.

 

[T Wake]

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:7db9$453a413d$49ecfae$4310@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ehd4o6$8qk_004@s884.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com...

In article <tidcj2hc7r29unnup0qjddadothkt473q2@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Wed, 18 Oct 06 11:51:42 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:


In article <e9ednZ8s0K3l2ajYRVnyuA@pipex.net>,
"T Wake" <usenet.es7at@gishpuppy.com> wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4535424A.C08609A3@hotmail.com...


T Wake wrote:


lucasea@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message


Certainly a lot of the details of Darwin's theories have been
subject
to
question and modification over the years. What has not changed is
the
basic idea of evolution.

Very true. There is a conflict of terminology and if the people on
the
radio
show were talking about "Darwin's theories" specifically they are a
bit
behind the curve. Modern evolutionary theory has progressed beyond
the
specifics Darwin described.

I've noticed that there is now a common tendency for those who reckon

they

know
better to dismiss such things as 'just theories' as if that meant
they

had

no
vailidity !


I love that phrase "just theories." It really makes me smile when some
creationist goes on about how "evolution is just a theory."

Like Newtonian Gravity isn't "just" a theory.

Yes. It is just a theory. It is the human race's best
guess at how nature and its laws work.

It's a pretty good theory but ignores relativistic effects. It's
quantitatively precise in most practical situations, but not all
situations, so it is indeed flawed, and not a "best guess."


I'm not going to deal with this one.


So why make any post? Why not just ignore it?

Because she had a point to make, and made it.

You really do struggle to comprehend posts, don't you? She made no point and
did nothing but post into the flow of a debate between others - without
adding to it.

What point do you think she was trying to make?

Sorry, I really shouldn't ask you questions which require you think. I will
avoid it in the future.

Please, come back with some more assumptions based on complete
misunderstanding.

 

[T Wake]

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:29e96$453a4272$49ecfae$4310@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake distorts as only a Muslim can:


Jesus was the son of God (Part of God if you belive in the holy trinity).
He gave his life rather than kill. This is the basic tenet of early
Christianity. It was modified significantly over the next three to nine
hundred years until by the end of the first millenium, Christianity was a
war like religion which appealed to the Scandinavians.

You make me laugh. I am far from being a Muslim and even further from
supporting the spread of Islam. I went to a Catholic Grammar school -
please, what did I distort? Or was the sole purpose of your post the attempt
to call me a Muslim?

 

[unsettled]

T Wake distorts as only a Muslim can:

Yet you allow, and encourage, capitalist extremism to prosper.

Untrue. We have laws restricting monopolistic practices
what are part and parcel of capitalism.

Extremism flourishes where fear and ignorance exist.

And where power has been handed over to extremists
in order to remain alive.

You are fanning the flames of extremism, and feel
that _your_ extremisim is acceptable as long as it
combats _their_ extremism.

Did you forget to take some of your meds today?

Now I understand. You're a Muslim or a MUslim shill.

No, as always, you don't understand. You live with assumptions and
McCarthy-esque claims and assertions.

You answer without specificity, leaving my argument intact.

 

[unsettled]

T Wake dsitorts as only a Muslim can:

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:c82fa$453a411d$49ecfae$4310@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake wrote:



I actually go out of my way to try and comprehend your point of view. You
obviously choose not to show me the same courtesy and, when your
standpoint becomes untenable, you fall back on accusing me of deliberate
misunderstanding.

Well done.

She's right. You're a Muslim or a Muslim shill.


Nonsense. But keep making your assumptions based on whatever you want to
make up


That being said,
you're so brainwashed your "truths" are limited to what you've
been "carefully taught." (see _South Pacific_)


Your idiocy overwhelms me.

You have once again left my arguments intact. Thank you.

 

[T Wake]

The thing which is "unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> continues to
demonstrate her total lack of comprehension in
news:c9703$453a4349$49ecfae$4370@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake distorts as only a Muslim can:

This is a line you really do not want to take. You cherry pick segments
of history which you hope will
support your viewpoints.

Thanks for this succinct demonstration of your most
prevalent distortion technique. See below.

I realise that like JoeBlow and some others here you have serious difficulty
with comprehension - largely because you already have more preconcevied
ideas than is healthy - but please try to keep up.

My example below is a demonstration of why cherry picking segments of
history is false. If you were able to follow the thread you would see it in
context. Sadly, you are obsessed with maintaing your viewpoint and blind to
everything else.

Are you talking about yourself here? Are you saying that because the
Turks killed the Christians in Anatolia they will all do it again? Which
ignore both the recent treatments in Islamic countries _and_ the
treatment of Christians by the likes of Salah Adin.

Here you go, an out of context snippet of history which has
little to no parallel.

Yes, see. It is a problem when people do that isn't it.

Thank you for agreeing with me.

_You_ are the person who is using Afghanistan under the Taliban as an
example of what would happen.

And does it again here

What was out of context about what I said there? BAH accused others of using
modern Islamic societies as a model of what would happen, yet she used
Taliban Afghanistan as the model.

You really are having comprehension problems, aren't you?

 

[T Wake]

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:188a2$453a4228$49ecfae$4310@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake distorted as only a Muslim can:

snip

Brother killing brother was not stopped by
conversion to Islam. It remains prevalent in
the culture.


No more or less prevalent than in any other culture.

Thank you for agreeing with me. Americans must be proud to have people like
you.

 

[T Wake]

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:9dd44$453a4b74$49ecfae$4540@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake distorts as only a Muslim can:


Yet you allow, and encourage, capitalist extremism to prosper.

Untrue. We have laws restricting monopolistic practices
what are part and parcel of capitalism.

The laws are good, yet this does not falsify my claim.

Extremism flourishes where fear and ignorance exist.

And where power has been handed over to extremists
in order to remain alive.

Yes. As I have said numerous times, sacrificing freedom to stay alive is a
mistake. I am glad you agree with me.

You are fanning the flames of extremism, and feel that _your_ extremisim
is acceptable as long as it
combats _their_ extremism.

Did you forget to take some of your meds today?

Do you want me to explain it in simple term for you?

Now I understand. You're a Muslim or a MUslim shill.

No, as always, you don't understand. You live with assumptions and
McCarthy-esque claims and assertions.

You answer without specificity, leaving my argument intact.

Your argument had no specificity and never started intact. I am not a
Muslim. Even if I was it is not relevant in anything other than your obscure
mindset and determination to demonise all who are "different" to you.

You have made an assumption and demand I give specifics to deny it. This is
untrue.

Now, as I said, you adhere to your McCarthy-esque approach which assumes I
am a Muslim because I disagree with you. You haven't read enough to see what
my view point is, you simply assume it.

I am proud of you.

 

[T Wake]

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:464db$453a4706$49ecfae$4431@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake distorts as only a Muslim can:

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:a8a9c$453a3a5b$49ecfae$4118@DIALUPUSA.NET...

Eeyore wrote:


jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:



I know I do not write clear enough for all values of IQs.


Mine's 152.

What's yours ?


You're good at taking IQ tests. Doesn't actually
mean you're "smart."

You are a funny guy.

That too, but it doesn't negate my comment above.

It was never meant to.

Your comment was valid. IQ does not mean smart.

You are not smart and probably have a low IQ.

Your comment above had nothing to add to the thread and was simply you
wanting to get in on the action. Why dont you go and eat some more
doughnuts.

I have realised you are a Left Wing plant to try and discredit the Right
Wingers in this thread. Well done.

This is very good. The more confused you and your
brothers are the better for me.

You are more confused than most.

 

[T Wake]

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:4c99d$453a4bba$49ecfae$4540@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake dsitorts as only a Muslim can:

"unsettled" <unsettled@nonsense.com> wrote in message
news:c82fa$453a411d$49ecfae$4310@DIALUPUSA.NET...

T Wake wrote:



I actually go out of my way to try and comprehend your point of view.
You obviously choose not to show me the same courtesy and, when your
standpoint becomes untenable, you fall back on accusing me of deliberate
misunderstanding.

Well done.

She's right. You're a Muslim or a Muslim shill.


Nonsense. But keep making your assumptions based on whatever you want to
make up


That being said,
you're so brainwashed your "truths" are limited to what you've
been "carefully taught." (see _South Pacific_)


Your idiocy overwhelms me.


You have once again left my arguments intact. Thank you.

Your arguments only exist intact in your fevered imagination. You have no
argument about me being a Muslim any more than I can say you are mental
health patient who thinks he is a Nazi storm trooper in disguise.

Now, as I said, you adhere to your McCarthy-esque approach which assumes I
am a Muslim because I disagree with you. You haven't read enough to see what
my view point is, you simply assume it.

I am proud of you.