In reply to Humble Scribe ) who wrote this in
se, I, Marvo, say :

In message , Uncle Marvo
writes
In reply to Humble Scribe ) who wrote
this in se, I, Marvo, say :

In message , Jason
Russell writes
How Soon We Forget . Please pause a moment, reflect back, and take
the following multiple choice test. (The events are actual cuts
from past history. They actually happened! Do you remember?)

(Snip of 14 questions)

You missed one out!

15 Some 600 prisoners were arrested, some were out-sourced to
mercenaries or to other countries to be tortured, most were
illegally incarcerated in cages in a location beyond the reach of
American law, most have been kept incommunicado for more than three
years, many attempted suicide (some succeeded), less than 1% have
been charged and convicted of terrorist offences. Were these:
1. Christians?
2. Jews?
3. American Muslims
4. Non-American Muslims?
4. Anybody with a dark skin, wearing Middle Eastern headgear in the
wrong place at the wrong time?

Good question, but I suspect maths isn't your strong suit :-)



Presuming you mean "arithmetic" not "math", you are nearly right.
Instead of saying 1.00% have been charged, I should have said 1.45%
(i.e. 9/619)!

No, I meant as in :

4. Non-American etc
4. Anybody etc

I would have thought that would be point 5 :-)

snip something about Guadelupe or something

[Research not *your* strong point? :-))]

True, but then I'm a noble Briton, so probably not at all interested in
American politics. We have enough on our own plate! However, I take your
point, OT that it might be, about the tendency for the arrestees to be of
the Muslim persuasion. I think it might be something to do with the fact
that the terrorist activities of late tend to be committed by youngish
Muslim chaps though, so perhaps arresting load of old christian ladies would
not be targeting the right people, statistically speaking.

I also note, having bothered to write this, that I am replying to every
newsgroup there is, so I must assume you are oone of these trolly types. But
I'll post it anyway, seems a waste not to now.

"Uncle Marvo" wrote in message
...
In reply to Humble Scribe ) who wrote this
in se, I, Marvo, say :

In message , Uncle Marvo
writes
In reply to Humble Scribe ) who wrote
this in se, I, Marvo, say :

In message , Jason
Russell writes
How Soon We Forget . Please pause a moment, reflect back, and take
the following multiple choice test. (The events are actual cuts
from past history. They actually happened! Do you remember?)

(Snip of 14 questions)

You missed one out!

15 Some 600 prisoners were arrested, some were out-sourced to
mercenaries or to other countries to be tortured, most were
illegally incarcerated in cages in a location beyond the reach of
American law, most have been kept incommunicado for more than three
years, many attempted suicide (some succeeded), less than 1% have
been charged and convicted of terrorist offences. Were these:
1. Christians?
2. Jews?
3. American Muslims
4. Non-American Muslims?
4. Anybody with a dark skin, wearing Middle Eastern headgear in the
wrong place at the wrong time?

Good question, but I suspect maths isn't your strong suit :-)



Presuming you mean "arithmetic" not "math", you are nearly right.
Instead of saying 1.00% have been charged, I should have said 1.45%
(i.e. 9/619)!

No, I meant as in :

4. Non-American etc
4. Anybody etc

I would have thought that would be point 5 :-)

snip something about Guadelupe or something

[Research not *your* strong point? :-))]

True, but then I'm a noble Briton, so probably not at all interested in
American politics. We have enough on our own plate! However, I take your
point, OT that it might be, about the tendency for the arrestees to be of
the Muslim persuasion. I think it might be something to do with the fact
that the terrorist activities of late tend to be committed by youngish
Muslim chaps though, so perhaps arresting load of old christian ladies
would not be targeting the right people, statistically speaking.

I also note, having bothered to write this, that I am replying to every
newsgroup there is, so I must assume you are oone of these trolly types.
But I'll post it anyway, seems a waste not to now.

At least you haven't crossposted it to all those unrelated newsgroups, not
that the subject is related to this one either!(:-)

Alan

In reply to Alan Holmes ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :


At least you haven't crossposted it to all those unrelated
newsgroups, not that the subject is related to this one either!(:-)

Alan

I know. I apologise. I just can't resist the bait!