RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
John D. Giorgis wrote: Incredible, Al Qaeda attacks Spain just three days before the election, and suddenly the voters plump for the opposition http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/03/14/spain.blasts.election/index.h tml So the Spaniards voted for the socialist party. How exactly does that translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 01:43:05PM +0530, ritu wrote: translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain. But does he mean mostly just the ETA, or does he mean all terrorism? -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
At 10:45 PM 3/14/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote: I wouldn't place all the blame (for the election results) on the terrorists - or is my recollection that there was little popular support for the Spanish government's backing of the Iraq [war] incorrect? Yes nevertheless, the ruling Party was widely expected to be returned to government until 3/11 which was widely perceived as retribution by Al Qaeda for Spain's support of the liberation of Iraq.The Spanish clearly decided that making the world a better place is not worth the price of being a target of Al Qaeda - best to let Al Qaeda concentrate on attacking the United States, apparently. that is certainly how this vote as being perceived. A very sad day in the War on Terror. Expect more sad days to follow. Instead of building a strong coalition to fight terrorism on all fronts we squandered the good will of the world to concentrate our power on deposing one washed up, nearly powerless dictator. It is worth noting the a majority of the world's industrialized democracies supported us in Iraq.Of the most notable industiralized democracies that did not support us, one was clearly engaged in election pandering against an opposition party that supported us.Another made no secret of the fact that their foreign policy consisted of taking the US down a notch.Other than that, however, the world's democracies stood behind us - a strong coalition if ever I saw one. But, clearly you believe that the war in Iraq should not have been pursued without a stronger coalition. Out of curiosity, why then, did you support the War in Yugoslavia over the objections of the international community? Additionally, let's say there was similar worldwide support for the War in Afghanistan? After all, Al Qaeda was an independent organization, and the Taliban certainly hadn't attacked the United States... Would you still have supported the War in Afghanistan over the objections of the International Community? Moreover in the future, to which other countries are you willing to assign this veto power over US foreign policy?China?Russia? France? Or are you merely using strong international coalitions as a red herring? Instead of spending our dollars on a world wide network to fight terrorism and on preventative measures we've spent $160 B on nation building. This is classic liberal thinking in measuring success by the amount of money spent on a problem, rather than the results.One of the most notable news stories of the past few months has been the US's success, with cooperation from the Pakistani government, in turning the Tribal Leaders of Pakistan's Northwest Territories into allies in the War on Terrorism and the hunt for Osama bin Laden.Given previous assesments of the strategic assessment in Pakistan's Northwest Territories, this is a remarkable turn of events indeed. Instead of low profile actions that strike at the heart of terrorism, we've provided Al Qaeda and other groups a spectacular recruiting tool. Do you have any evidence that the presence of US troops in Iraq is proving a stronger recruiting tool for Al Qaeda than the presence of US troops in the Muslim Holy Land in Saudi Arabia?Presuming that US troops had to be located in either Iraq or Saudi Arabia, isn't a temporary deployment in Iraq - eventually leading to handover to the United Nations or a democratic Iraq a better scenario for US in our conflict with Al Qaeda than an interminable US deployment in the Muslim Holy Land? What's interesting, John, is how effective the inspections in Iran have been. There was stuff to find and they found it. Just like Iraq - there was stuff to find and... oh wait... the inspectors didn't find anything and amazingly enough it turned out that it was because there wasn't anything to find. Hm. What is interesting is that these stories are *not* being broken by IAEA inspectors, but by an Iranian defector and US spies. What is also amazing is that Iran dodged IAEA inspections for *18* years without being caught - coming within two years of being able to produce a nuclear weapon.In 1991, Saddam Hussein was within one year of being able to produce a nuclear weapon - with the world being saved from a diastrous scenario only by Hussein's gross miscalculation in invading Kuwait before his program had reached fruition. Are you really suggesting that inspections work because we can always count on a defector or a gross strategic miscalculation at just the criticial moment before a bomb is built? And if inspections really work, how did the DPRK manage to build a bomb right underneath our noses, while Bill Clinton was paying them bribes to specifically *not* build such a bomb? I'm sorry Doug, but the evidence simply does not support your conclusion that inspections work. indeed, any US President who supported your conclusions would clearly be guilty of criminal malpractice, based on the
RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
Erik Reuter asked: On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 01:43:05PM +0530, ritu wrote: translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain. But does he mean mostly just the ETA, or does he mean all terrorism? I have no idea and wouldn't be able to hazard a guess until he has been in office for some time. In any case, I doubt he would suddenly, dramatically alter the composition of the Spanish Government's 'List of Terrorist Organisations' and speak up/act in favour of violent extremists. I also doubt that his answer to the problem of terrorism would be the same as Aznar's. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
ritu wrote: So the Spaniards voted for the socialist party. How exactly does that translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain. Only a couple of days before the attack the popular party (or however you say that in Spanish) was expected to be comfortably returned to power, but after the attack, the voters seemed to be saying that they felt the Popular Party's support for the US WAT had made them a target, and they chose the party which vocally opposed the US WAT. While it would have been more accurate for John to say it was a loss to the American anti-terrorist efforts than a win to Al-Queda, one really means the other in the long run. The sad part is that it is just one more of many things that have diminished The War Against Terror. Cheers Russell C. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
--- ritu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So the Spaniards voted for the socialist party. How exactly does that translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain. Ritu Well, the attacks seem pretty clearly to have been launched to achieve exactly this result. 1. Terrorists attack to get a certain result 2. Terrorists get the result that they want I think that meets most reasonable definitions of a victory for terrorists. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
At 06:18 PM 3/15/2004 +0530 ritu wrote: But does he mean mostly just the ETA, or does he mean all terrorism? I have no idea and wouldn't be able to hazard a guess until he has been in office for some time. I have seen reports this morning that the Socialists are already vowing to bring the troops home from Iraq - thereby undermining the rebuilding effort in Iraq. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
Russell Chapman wrote: ritu wrote: So the Spaniards voted for the socialist party. How exactly does that translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain. Only a couple of days before the attack the popular party (or however you say that in Spanish) was expected to be comfortably returned to power, but after the attack, the voters seemed to be saying that they felt the Popular Party's support for the US WAT had made them a target, and they chose the party which vocally opposed the US WAT. True. But what the reports also say is that the voters were most disgusted with the incumbent party's handling of the investigations: http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2004/03/15/grieving_spain_oust s_ruling_party/ * The Popular Party's surprising demise was the result of a punishing electorate, political analysts said, that lashed out at the way the government handled the investigation of the train bombings, accusing it of playing political games with the bloodiest atrocity in Spain since the 1936 civil war. The incumbents were seen as trying to gain a political advantage by blaming the attacks on the Basque separatist group, ETA -- which is on the US State Department list of terrorist organizations -- despite ETA's repeated denials and intelligence assessments that the attacks were more likely connected to Al Qaeda. The government has been playing with information, manipulating us like [the late Spanish dictator Francisco] Franco used to do, said Pedro Munoz, 62, referring to what he said was the government's exaggeration of the threat in Iraq and the attempt by the government to paint ETA as the main suspect despite information that contradicted that. No one wanted the war in Iraq, but Aznar didn't listen to the population. Then he lied to us about the train bombings, and that was too much. He paid the price for the lies, said Munoz, a retired car dealer, shouting over the cheering crowds last night at the Socialist Party headquarters. ** While it would have been more accurate for John to say it was a loss to the American anti-terrorist efforts than a win to Al-Queda, one really means the other in the long run. Um, not really. Depends on what you think of the current US tactics in this WAT. Let's say, Kerry wins the US Presidential elections. He is going to dramatically alter the US response to terrorism. Would that too count as a win for Al-Qaeda? I think it would have been accurate to say that this is bad news for Bush's version of war against terror but then relatively few people in the world would consider that a bad thing. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
John D. Giorgis wrote: But does he mean mostly just the ETA, or does he mean all terrorism? I have no idea and wouldn't be able to hazard a guess until he has been in office for some time. I have seen reports this morning that the Socialists are already vowing to bring the troops home from Iraq - thereby undermining the rebuilding effort in Iraq. Yep. He has already said that the troops would return after their current tour of duty unless there is more UN involvement. But to consider that a victory for terrorism, you need to be convinced that the war on Iraq was a legitimate part of the war on terror. A lot of people disagree with that notion. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Only in California
City falls victim to Internet hoax, considers banning items made with water http://www.sacbee.com/state_wire/story/8518740p-9447551c.html ALISO VIEJO, Calif. (AP) - City officials were so concerned about the potentially dangerous properties of dihydrogen monoxide that they considered banning foam cups after they learned the chemical was used in their production. Then they learned that dihydrogen monoxide - H2O for short - is the scientific term for water. It's embarrassing, said City Manager David J. Norman. We had a paralegal who did bad research. The paralegal apparently fell victim to one of the many official looking Web sites that have been put up by pranksters to describe dihydrogen monoxide as an odorless, tasteless chemical that can be deadly if accidentally inhaled. As a result, the City Council of this Orange County suburb had been scheduled to vote next week on a proposed law that would have banned the use of foam containers at city-sponsored events. Among the reasons given for the ban were that they were made with a substance that could threaten human health and safety. The measure has been pulled from the agenda, although Norman said the city may still eventually ban foam cups. Our main concern is with the Aliso Creek watershed, Norman said. If you get Styrofoam into the water and it breaks apart, it's virtually impossible to clean up. Kevin T. - VRWC I had to check the date to make sure ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Class Warfare...
Speaking of Bill Maher... Found on another mailing list... http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/03/13/washingtonoutsiders/ New rule: You can't be a Washington outsider if you're already president. by Bill Maher March 13, 2004 Hearing President Bush these days constantly complain about the politicians and John Kerry being part of a Washington mind-set, and saying things like I got news for the Washington crowd is like hearing Courtney Love bitch about junkies. Washington insider is by definition a function of one's proximity to the president. That's you, Mr. Bush. You're ground zero. Ever wonder, sir, why everyone stands and they play music when you enter a room? When you're given check-writing privileges by the Federal Reserve, you just might be a Washington insider. Lemme try to explain it to you in a different way: You're not Mr. Smith goes to Washington -- you're the Washington part. We need a Mr. Smith to mess with you. You're not on a mission you reluctantly accepted, like the old farts in Space Cowboys. You campaigned for this job, and now you're doing it again. And having been the Grand Poobah for three years, it's a little late to be selling yourself as some fish-out-of-water cowboy visiting the big city on assignment. You're not McCloud, you're the grandson of a senator and the son of a president and CIA director. For 15 of the last 22 years you've had a key to the White House. The last thing that happened in Washington without the Bushes getting a piece of it was Marion Barry's crack habit. The Exorcist happened in Georgetown, but Satan had to run it by Jim Baker first. So knock off the regular-guy act -- and by the way, that also goes for John Forbes Kerry, the other white meat. Two Skull and Bones preppies, these guys are, from Nantucket and Kennebunkport, who use the word summer as a verb and probably had monogrammed beer bongs in college. Please, John Kerry: Stop rolling up your sleeves at campaign rallies like you're about to man a register at Costco. You're a Boston Brahmin who married not one but two eccentric heiresses -- you're not Joe Sixpack, you're Claus von Bulow. I think your current wife is great, but hello, she inherited the Heinz fortune! She's the ketchup lady! -- which explains why sometimes he's gotta smack her on the bottom to get her to come. Look, fellas, we've got almost eight months till the election. That's a long time to hold in your gut. To pretend you're something you're not. Let's just be real and admit that finally, and unfortunately, true class warfare has come to America: Yale class of '66 vs. Yale class of '68. - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
[ADMIN] Call for administrative action
I've been extraordinarily busy the last few weeks and brin-l has had to take a back seat to a lot of it. But I have done my best over the last few days to read at least some, if not a majority, of the threads in which people have become obnoxious, abusive, etc., leading to complaints and requests for administrative action. From my point of view, people indeed have posted messages that fall outside of our guidelines. Others have responded with messages to Julia and me, saying do something. Here's the administrative action that I'll propose -- feel free to offer your own, of course. Let's do a self-audit. If you found recent postings to be outside the guidelines, please send an off-list e-mail to the person who posted the message, saying so. And I urge you to say nothing more -- just copy the message and write that you believe it was outside of the guidelines, period. I'm not calling for for anyone to write criticism. I'm asking for you to offer your point of view about whether the messages fit the guidelines -- not about what the messages said, not about the authors, not about the guidelines. I'm not suggesting that this will put this issue to rest, but I think it's a good first response to list-unrest. Nick -- Nick Arnett Director, Business Intelligence Services LiveWorld Inc. Phone/fax: (408) 551-0427 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
New Pentagon Papers Author
The Weekly Stanard does a few quick excerpts from the oeuvre of the author of the New Pentagon Papers: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/849czxps.asp So, Doug, I think you were the person who posted how important these were to the list. How do you feel about endorsing this person's views? My own personal favorite would be, from the article: Kwiatkowski accused the Pentagon of planning to 'build greater Zion' in the Middle East and decried the 'Zionist political cult that has lassoed the E-Ring' This lunatic, by the way, has been favorably quoted by Ted Kennedy. What is it about opposing the war and being an anti-semite? I mean, I understand why anti-semites opposed the war, that makes perfect sense to me. But how did otherwise reasonable people decide that anti-semitism in other people who thought the war shouldn't happen was okay, as long as you agreed on that? = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Race to the Bottom
- Original Message - From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 5:53 PM Subject: Re: Race to the Bottom At 03:38 PM 3/13/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote: Right here is where I depart. The labor pool of possible employees increased by 49% from '57 to '80, but by only 32% from '80 to '03. (The participation in the work force increased 60% and 37%, respectively. During the first time period inequality decreased; during the second it increased. Not only that, but the increase was not just a transfer of income share from the poor to the rich, it was a transfer from everyone to the rich. I don't understand what you are driving at here. I think that you jumped into the middle of a discussion between Gautam and myself, where I disagreed with Gautam on fairly narrow grounds. Let me review the discussion from my perspective to show where I see Gautam and me agreeing and disagreeing. Gautam put forth the following statements in two posts: Post 1 3/12 11 AM First, the impact has been measured - George Borjas's book _Heaven's Door_ attributed half of the difference between American and German income inequality to immigration. Second, I don't understand how your metric would measure the impact, which comes from two different factors. The first is the constant influx of a large pool of largely unskilled labor (of largely Hispanic ethnicity), which has an impact. But more than that, the simple presence of these number of laborers will decrease the price of low-skilled labor for everyone, white, black, and Hispanic alike. 3/12 12:40 PM I'm sorry Dan, I don't think that addresses his point, because the rest of the disparity could be a product of the drag on incomes produced by the simple presence of a large number of lower-skilled immigrants. The problem is that the inflow affects different classes in disparate ways. It helps wealthy and high-skilled people - decreasing costs for them. It hurts low-skilled people - by increasing the competition for their labor. Borjas estimated (IIRC) that the end result of large-scale low-skilled immigration since 1980 has been a transfer of $150BB from employees to employers - largely from low-skilled, low-wage employees who have seen their wages driven down relatively to employers. ___ As I see it, Borjas's arguement is that immigration in the US has resulted in an oversupply of low skilled labor which has depressed the wage scale, especially at the lower end. He claims that half of the difference between the US and the German income inequality is due to this excess of cheap labor. I agree with much of what he said: my differences are fairly narrow. I agree that the growth in income inequality is a result of a relative oversupply of labor vs. the demand for labor, keeping wages down. I agree that, as a result, income inequality has grown. Where I disagree is whether the emphasis should be placed on the accelerated increase in the supply of labor vs. a deceleration in the increase of the demand for labor. My arguement is that the labor supply between '80 and '03 has grown less than it did between '57 and '80so that the emphasis should be more on the slowing of the increase in the need for labor than the acceleration of the supply. The difference with Germany can be seen more in terms of the drastic slowdown in the increase in the German labor supply, making labor more scarce and valuable than in the US. I'd be curious to see if Borjas adressed the two ways of looking at the differences in the balance between supply and demand for labor in Germany and the US. He may, for example, have assumed the decelleration on the demand for labor as a given...I don't know. I hope this helps to clarify things. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Class Warfare...
At 10:39 AM 3/15/2004, you wrote: Speaking of Bill Maher... Found on another mailing list... http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/03/13/washingtonoutsiders/ New rule: You can't be a Washington outsider if you're already president. by Bill Maher March 13, 2004 Hearing President Bush these days constantly complain about the politicians and John Kerry being part of a Washington mind-set, and saying things like I got news for the Washington crowd is like hearing Courtney Love bitch about junkies. Washington insider is by definition a function of one's proximity to the president. That's you, Mr. Bush. You're ground zero. Ever wonder, sir, why everyone stands and they play music when you enter a room? When you're given check-writing privileges by the Federal Reserve, you just might be a Washington insider. Lemme try to explain it to you in a different way: You're not Mr. Smith goes to Washington -- you're the Washington part. We need a Mr. Smith to mess with you. You're not on a mission you reluctantly accepted, like the old farts in Space Cowboys. You campaigned for this job, and now you're doing it again. And having been the Grand Poobah for three years, it's a little late to be selling yourself as some fish-out-of-water cowboy visiting the big city on assignment. You're not McCloud, you're the grandson of a senator and the son of a president and CIA director. For 15 of the last 22 years you've had a key to the White House. The last thing that happened in Washington without the Bushes getting a piece of it was Marion Barry's crack habit. The Exorcist happened in Georgetown, but Satan had to run it by Jim Baker first. So knock off the regular-guy act -- and by the way, that also goes for John Forbes Kerry, the other white meat. Two Skull and Bones preppies, these guys are, from Nantucket and Kennebunkport, who use the word summer as a verb and probably had monogrammed beer bongs in college. Please, John Kerry: Stop rolling up your sleeves at campaign rallies like you're about to man a register at Costco. You're a Boston Brahmin who married not one but two eccentric heiresses -- you're not Joe Sixpack, you're Claus von Bulow. I think your current wife is great, but hello, she inherited the Heinz fortune! She's the ketchup lady! -- which explains why sometimes he's gotta smack her on the bottom to get her to come. Look, fellas, we've got almost eight months till the election. That's a long time to hold in your gut. To pretend you're something you're not. Let's just be real and admit that finally, and unfortunately, true class warfare has come to America: Yale class of '66 vs. Yale class of '68. - jmh Damn you TV! I believed, from the West Wing, that the vice presidents office was in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building; but the official white house web site says that is only a ceremonial office, that the vice president's real office is in the white house proper. My beef was 'for 15 of the last 22 years you've had a new to the white house'. I have a key to my brother's house. If he was out of the country I could go in with no trouble. I doubt the adult son of the vice president or president could go to the white house to hang out and watch TV while his dad was throwing up in Japan. And isn't the math a little fuzzy? Why isn't it 15 of the last 23 years? Still the article is shit. Even if bush had a key to the white house, he was in private business for those years, or the governor of Texas. Hardly a Washington insider since his dad wasn't in office at that time. The last crack about class warfare: the dems could have chosen anyone they wanted. They chose a 18 year US senator (a job performed in Washington), someone who did go to Yale, someone who was rich at birth and got richer by marrying money. Maybe we can revisit Terry Jones' poor analogy comparing the war in Iraq with tolerating a rude neighbor. Kevin T. - VRWC ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Race to the Bottom
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hope this helps to clarify things. Dan M. I think it does - I'm not sure that we disagree at all. If the decrease in the demand for labor is uniform across all industrialized countries, then it may be reasonable to assume it as a given (I don't know that Borjas does). I'm not sure, though, that your numbers on labor supply increase include illegals - if they don't, then that doesn't take into account a huge factor, both because of the huge # of illegals and because they have a larger impact than their pure numbers would imply. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Thoughts on gay marriage?
- Original Message - From: The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 12:08 PM Subject: Re: Thoughts on gay marriage? From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 09:35 PM 2/27/2004 + Richard Baker wrote: JDG said: At any rate, I find it has hardly been established that there somehow exists a universal right to marry a person of the same sex. If we start from the premise that men and women should have equal rights, then it's obvious, isn't it? After all, women have the right to marry men, therefore men must have the right to marry men too. And similarly, men have the right to marry women therefore women must also have that right. Or do you think that men and women should not have equal rights? (I suppose it could be argued that they should have equal but not *identical* rights, but that seems a dodgy position to me, because there doesn't seem to be any way to determine the equality of non-identical rights, and such a system would clearly be open to abuse.) Bascially, what you are saying is that the Equal Rights Amendment would have required the institution of homosexual marriages. Thank goodness we voted that thing down. So now we have JDG bringing out the misogyny in addition to the homophobia and the hate. When JDG's true bigoted colors show, they sure aint pretty. One of the most irrational of all the conventions of modern society is the one to the effect that religious opinions should be respected. ...[This] convention protects them, and so they proceed with their blather unwhipped and almost unmolested, to the great damage of common sense and common decency. that they should have this immunity is an outrage. There is nothing in religious ideas, as a class, to lift them above other ideas. On the contrary, they are always dubious and often quite silly. Nor is there any visible intellectual dignity in theologians. Few of them know anything that is worth knowing, and not many of them are even honest. So you think freedom of speech should protect use of the word fuck but shouldn't protect the right of people to talk about their religious beliefs? And once again, you've used a quote, this time a rather long one, without crediting the author. The author, whoever he or she may be, has obviously made some value judgements about religion that agree with your beliefs but don't agree with the beliefs of many others here. I can post plenty of uncredited quotes that make absolutely the opposite value judgement. And one of the main points of the first amendment was to protect the ability of anyone to make any political or religious or social or artistic statement they want to. Reggie Bautista ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Thoughts on gay marriage?
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=16523 -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ 'The true sausage buff will sooner or later want his own meat grinder.' -- Jack Schmidling ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
From: Alberto Monteiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 01:04:05 + JDG wrote: Incredible, Al Qaeda attacks Spain just three days before the election, and suddenly the voters plump for the opposition It's an expected result. People around the world aren't too worried to help the USA fight terrorism, if this means that people will die. Alberto Monteiro What people don't seem to realize is that terrorism can potentially affect us all. And, that the US of A is currently engaged in a WAR against the threat of terrorism. And, that in war death is to be expected. And, that war is sometimes necessary. It is sad really that Spain has bent under pressure. Like the subject line says: Terrorists WIN... And that's the team I was hoping would lose. -Travis _ http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ADMIN] Call for administrative action Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 07:52:31 -0800 From my point of view, people indeed have posted messages that fall outside of our guidelines. They have indeed. But the problem is that certain people are quite cleverly saying that they don't recognize certain guidelines. Spouting such inane comments as, and I'll paraphrase - I didn't agree to that. Here's the administrative action that I'll propose -- feel free to offer your own, of course. Let's do a self-audit. If you found recent postings to be outside the guidelines, please send an off-list e-mail to the person who posted the message, saying so. And I urge you to say nothing more -- just copy the message and write that you believe it was outside of the guidelines, period. SNIP I'm not suggesting that this will put this issue to rest, but I think it's a good first response to list-unrest. Nick I think that's a great idea. However it will not be very effective unless the particular person you're e-mailing actually recognizes the guidelines here. Of course you covered yourself by stating in no uncertain terms that this probably won't put this issue to rest. But that just leads me to ask a question: If it won't work (and I sincerely doubt that it will) then why bother with it? Unless of course you have some type of unwritten rule, as to how you deal with admin issues on the first response. If not, then I would certainly encourage a more effective response. -Travis just a couple of cents Edmunds _ MSN Premium includes powerful parental controls and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Amend list guidelines
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Amend list guidelines Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 21:41:28 -0500 On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 02:24:18PM -0700, Trent Shipley wrote: Is there a second? No, too complicated by far. If we must have a guideline, I suggest just one, short and simple. Something like Please be tolerant of what others choose to write, and do not write (or do) anything that could cause real-life harm or be construed as a threat to cause real-life harm to members of the list. Just a thought, but that sounds like a whole lot of insincere psychobabble to me. Tolerance? Wow. You must have had quite a change of heart Erik, to suggest tolerance. I do hope you are sincere though. I hate being thought of as an idiot who posts meaningless thoughts, and isn't worth conversing with. -Travis I'm willing to bet I'm not the only one hoping for sincerity Edmunds _ MSN Premium: Up to 11 personalized e-mail addresses and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-capage=byoa/premxAPID=1994DI=1034SU=http://hotmail.com/encaHL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Thoughts on gay marriage?
Reggie said: So you think freedom of speech should protect use of the word fuck but shouldn't protect the right of people to talk about their religious beliefs? I think that freedom of speech should protect both, but I think that using fuck et al shows a lamentable lack of articulacy in most cases, and that religious beliefs are pretty silly, all things considered. This isn't, of course, even remotely a contradictory position. Rich ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
demand for labor : Was Re: Race to the Bottom
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hope this helps to clarify things. Dan M. I think it does - I'm not sure that we disagree at all. If the decrease in the demand for labor is uniform across all industrialized countries, then it may be reasonable to assume it as a given (I don't know that Borjas does). I'm not sure, though, that your numbers on labor supply increase include illegals - if they don't, then that doesn't take into account a huge factor, both because of the huge # of illegals and because they have a larger impact than their pure numbers would imply. The other factor it doesn't seem to adress is the skill of the labor itself. Not all labor is the same. I'm treading a thin line here again, I know. I am suggesting that the quality of the work performed may have an effect on the demand as well. If enough workers who produce low quality results enter the market, then differentiating those capable of high quality becomes nearly imposible. This in turn drives down the compensation for everyone, even though there is a differnce in the product. This is used as a technique by record companies to try and make downloading music for free unworthwhile. They put so many bad files out that people get tired of looking for a good one and go buy the CD. If the labor pool is seen as evenly producing a low quality of product, the intracacy and dificulty that will be attepted may decrease, thus lowering the demand for those capable of producing high quality work. There may be those capable of producing that high quality, and they may be willing to work for only a little more than those who are not capable, but those wanting the work to be done may not be able to tell the difference, and thus select to do a more simple or easier solution. I have no references for this, becouse it is just something I have noticed anicdotaly. I would not know how to test for this, or rather, how to isolate this factor. I am interested however in what Dan's and Gautam's opinions. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
Let's say, Kerry wins the US Presidential elections. He is going to dramatically alter the US response to terrorism. Would that too count as a win for Al-Qaeda? They'll think it is. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Only in California
At 09:07 AM 3/15/04, Kevin Tarr wrote: City falls victim to Internet hoax, considers banning items made with water http://www.sacbee.com/state_wire/story/8518740p-9447551c.html ALISO VIEJO, Calif. (AP) - City officials were so concerned about the potentially dangerous properties of dihydrogen monoxide that they considered banning foam cups after they learned the chemical was used in their production. At least they didn't require that the label of every bottle of bottled water include that statement This product contains a chemical known to the State of California to be dangerous to human health and safety. Then they learned that dihydrogen monoxide - H2O for short - is the scientific term for water. It's embarrassing, said City Manager David J. Norman. We had a paralegal who did bad research. One hopes this will lead to them looking closer at the minimum qualifications for job position of paralegal. The paralegal apparently fell victim to one of the many official looking Web sites that have been put up by pranksters to describe dihydrogen monoxide as an odorless, tasteless chemical that can be deadly if accidentally inhaled. Which is entirely accurate. For that matter, so are both of its component gases, as well as is nitrogen, which is found in the air everywhere, including even California cities with stringent air quality regulations. As a result, the City Council of this Orange County suburb had been scheduled to vote next week on a proposed law that would have banned the use of foam containers at city-sponsored events. Among the reasons given for the ban were that they were made with a substance that could threaten human health and safety. The measure has been pulled from the agenda, although Norman said the city may still eventually ban foam cups. Our main concern is with the Aliso Creek watershed, Norman said. If you get Styrofoam into the water and it breaks apart, it's virtually impossible to clean up. Kevin T. - VRWC I had to check the date to make sure Either they are starting early this year, or you found a perennial. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Fwd: New Distant 'Planetoid' Seen in Our Solar System
New Distant 'Planetoid' Seen in Our Solar System WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A newly discovered dark and frigid world, a bit smaller than Pluto and three times farther away, has emerged as the most distant object in the solar system, astronomers said on Monday. The new planetoid, named Sedna after an Inuit goddess who created the sea creatures of the Arctic, is by far the coldest and most distant object known to orbit the sun, a team of researchers announced. At more than 8 billion miles from the sun, the temperature on Sedna never gets above minus 400 degrees Fahrenheit. The sun appears so small from that distance that you could completely block it out with the head of a pin, said Mike Brown, an astronomer at California Institute of Technology, who led the research team. First detected on Nov. 14 with the Samuel Oschin Telescope near San Diego, California, Sedna was observed within days on telescopes from Chile to Spain, Arizona and Hawaii. NASA (news - web sites)'s new orbiting Spitzer Space Telescope, which looks at the universe with infrared detectors that peer through cosmic dust, was also trained on the distant object. The Spitzer scope found that Sedna probably has about three-fourths the diameter of Pluto, which would make it the biggest object found in the solar system since Pluto's discovery in 1930. For further info: http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/sedna/ [Nice graphics and everything.] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children to marry Nancy Reagan who bore him a daughter 7 months after the marriage. Bob Dole - divorced the mother of his child, who had nursed him through the long recovery from his war wounds. Newt Gingrich - divorced his wife who was dying of cancer. Dick Armey - House Majority Leader - divorced. Senator Phil Gramm of Texas - divorced. Governor John Engler of Michigan - divorced. Governor Pete Wilson of California - divorced. George Will - divorced. Senator Lauch Faircloth - divorced. Rush Limbaugh - and his current wife, Marta, have six marriages and four divorces between them. Senator Bob Barr of Georgia - not yet 50 years old, has been married three times. He had the audacity to author and push the Defense of MarriageAct. The current joke making the rounds on Capitol Hill is Bob Barr - WHICH marriage are you defending?!?) Senator Alfonse D'Amato of New York - divorced. Senator John Warner of Virginia - once married to Elizabeth Taylor. Governor George Allen of Virginia - divorced. Representative Helen Chenoweth of Idaho - divorced. Senator John McCain of Arizona - divorced. Representative John Kasich of Ohio - divorced. Representative Susan Molinari of New York (Republican National Convention Keynote Speaker) - divorced. The bottom line - Don't let gays destroy marriage - that's the job of the Republicans! xponent Just Another Anti-Republican Screed Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: New Pentagon Papers Author
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Weekly Stanard does a few quick excerpts from the oeuvre of the author of the New Pentagon Papers: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/849c zxps.asp So, Doug, I think you were the person who posted how important these were to the list. How do you feel about endorsing this person's views? My own personal favorite would be, from the article: Kwiatkowski accused the Pentagon of planning to 'build greater Zion' in the Middle East and decried the 'Zionist political cult that has lassoed the E-Ring' This lunatic, by the way, has been favorably quoted by Ted Kennedy. What is it about opposing the war and being an anti-semite? I mean, I understand why anti-semites opposed the war, that makes perfect sense to me. But how did otherwise reasonable people decide that anti-semitism in other people who thought the war shouldn't happen was okay, as long as you agreed on that? Neo-conservatives and zionists would be very strange bedfellows. The ideals of the movers and shackers would not necisarily be aligned in the ways we would expect. The more she writes, the more it sounds plausable. She definatly has a few bridges to burn, and she may ~seem~ anti- symetic, but be carfull that you are not having a programmed knee jerk response. What has she said that seems anti-symetic any way? Is it the zionist talk? (I haven't read everything she has weritten). Just becouse the hollicost happened, and just becouse there are anti- symites out there blaming zionism for their ills, and acusing a whole people for zionism, doesn't mean that there are no zionists. I have to say that I have no idea what is going on. And that in it'self scares me. We are, as a democratic nation, supposed to know what is happening, and we obviously don't. Even is she is full of dren, we still really don't know what is happening, becouse we do know that it's bad enough that (if she is lying etc.) people like her are there in place and being people like her. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Scouted: U.S. Videos, for TV News, Come Under Scrutiny
Considering the outrage of certain members of this list over taxpayer funding of NPR, I expect them to evince equal fury for this example of taxpayer money being used for what is essentially propaganda. Government-produced fake newscasts are particularly despicable, in my opinion. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/15/politics/15VIDE.html WASHINGTON, March 14 Federal investigators are scrutinizing television segments in which the Bush administration paid people to pose as journalists praising the benefits of the new Medicare law, which would be offered to help elderly Americans with the costs of their prescription medicines. The videos are intended for use in local television news programs. Several include pictures of President Bush receiving a standing ovation from a crowd cheering as he signed the Medicare law on Dec. 8. The materials were produced by the Department of Health and Human Services, which called them video news releases, but the source is not identified. Two videos end with the voice of a woman who says, In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting. But the production company, Home Front Communications, said it had hired her to read a script prepared by the government. Another video, intended for Hispanic audiences, shows a Bush administration official being interviewed in Spanish by a man who identifies himself as a reporter named Alberto Garcia. Another segment shows a pharmacist talking to an elderly customer. The pharmacist says the new law helps you better afford your medications, and the customer says, It sounds like a good idea. Indeed, the pharmacist says, A very good idea. The government also prepared scripts that can be used by news anchors introducing what the administration describes as a made-for-television story package. In one script, the administration suggests that anchors use this language: In December, President Bush signed into law the first-ever prescription drug benefit for people with Medicare. Since then, there have been a lot of questions about how the law will help older Americans and people with disabilities. Reporter Karen Ryan helps sort through the details. The reporter then explains the benefits of the new law. Lawyers from the General Accounting Office, an investigative arm of Congress, discovered the materials last month when they were looking into the use of federal money to pay for certain fliers and advertisements that publicize the Medicare law. In a report to Congress last week, the lawyers said those fliers and advertisements were legal, despite notable omissions and other weaknesses. Administration officials said the television news segments were also a legal, effective way to educate beneficiaries. Gary L. Kepplinger, deputy general counsel of the accounting office, said, We are actively considering some follow-up work related to the materials we received from the Department of Health and Human Services. One question is whether the government might mislead viewers by concealing the source of the Medicare videos, which have been broadcast by stations in Oklahoma, Louisiana and other states. Federal law prohibits the use of federal money for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized by Congress. In the past, the General Accounting Office has found that federal agencies violated this restriction when they disseminated editorials and newspaper articles written by the government or its contractors without identifying the source. Kevin W. Keane, a spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services, said there was nothing nefarious about the television materials, which he said had been distributed to stations nationwide. Under federal law, he said, the government is required to inform beneficiaries about changes in Medicare. The use of video news releases is a common, routine practice in government and the private sector, Mr. Keane said. Anyone who has questions about this practice needs to do some research on modern public information tools. But Democrats disagreed. These materials are even more disturbing than the Medicare flier and advertisements, said Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey. The distribution of these videos is a covert attempt to manipulate the press. -- Tom Beck my LiveJournal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/tomfodw/ I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never thought I'd see the last. - Dr. Jerry Pournelle -- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: New Pentagon Papers Author
--- Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Neo-conservatives and zionists would be very strange bedfellows. Not really - neocons and those people commonly referred to as Zionists often share quite a few policy interests - among them a belief (as I believe) that the security of the state of Israel should be the United States's highest priority in the Middle East. Also the belief that terrorism should be fought by fighting terrorists, not giving them what they want. What has she said that seems anti-symetic any way? Is it the zionist talk? (I haven't read everything she has weritten). Indeed it is. Talking about Zionist conspiracies is one of the hallmarks of the anti-semite, I would think. Jews are just like everyone else, except more people hate them. They are not particularly prone to conspiracy, and arguing that some sort of Jewish cabal took us to war in Iraq is absurd (particularly for an Administration that has, count them, _zero_ Jewish Cabinet level officials) but absurd under any circumstances). Why would anyone believe that unless they were predisposed to think ill of Jews? Someone may disagree with the war - a perfectly reasonable position. But there were plenty of honest reasons to go to war, and plenty of honest people who thought that it was a good idea. Just becouse the hollicost happened, and just becouse there are anti- symites out there blaming zionism for their ills, and acusing a whole people for zionism, doesn't mean that there are no zionists. Not sure how this tracks. What's wrong with being a Zionist? Being a Zionist generally means that you believe that the State of Israel should exist as the home of the Jewish people. Well, by that definition I am a Zionist, and I'm proud of that fact. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
The bottom line - Don't let gays destroy marriage - that's the job of the Republicans! Looking deeper, this is nothing more that Serial Polygamy. The only difference is the time line it occurs. There are laws against parallel polygamy, but not serial polygamy. You are right... Its hypocritical to act as if gay Marriage is wrong for biblical reasons, yet they do not hold themselves to the same biblical standards. If they truly support traditional, culturally acceptable, biblically correct marriage, they would allow other forms of marriage including parallel polygamy. Because they do NOT, they have no basis in which to judge other forms of marriage. Nerd From Hell xponent Just Another Anti-Republican Screed Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Stargate SG-1
... Stargate: Atlantis was geared more toward the younger audience than SG-1 currently has and is using younger actors and more action oriented storylines, not to mention the TA factor to a greater degree than SG-1 did. It's a goner...!! TA automatically takes it out of the serious Sci-fi genre, into an Aaron Spelling-isk drama... Enterprise is riding that line... BTW anyone see the Enterprise Season Final? Enterprise is getting its ass kicked... Very cool. Nerd from Hell ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Scientist Attacks Hoagland
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040315.html War of the Words: Scientist Attacks Alien Claims Astronomer Philip Plait is tired of radio personality Richard Hoagland's claims. He's had enough of Hoagland's assertions that NASA is covering up evidence of extraterrestrial life, that the infamous Face on Mars was built by sentient aliens and, of late, that otherworldly machine parts are embedded in the red planet's dirt. And then there's the mile-long translucent Martian worm. On Hoagland's web site, there are several images from various space probes said to possibly show evidence for ET. Recent Mars rover photos include not just rocks, Hoagland and other contributors maintain, but common objects that might tell of alien civilization -- a bowl, a stove, a piston. Hoagland has since 1983, he says, led an outside scientific team in a critically acclaimed independent analysis of possible intelligently-designed artifacts on other worlds, using spacecraft data from NASA and other missions. Plait, author of Bad Astronomy (Wiley Sons, 2002), which debunks space myths and common factual misconceptions, had for years not countered Hoagland directly, because he did not want to give a man he calls a pseudoscientist the air time that he so desperately seeks. But last week Plait took his intellectual gloves off. Shapes in the clouds Plait has two words for the latest claims of alien objects on Mars. The first is garbage. The second and more scientific word is pareidolia. This is the same phenomenon that makes us see animals or other familiar objects in clouds. It's pretty common, Plait said of pareidolia. Just a few months ago, a water spot on my shower curtain took on the uncanny form of the face of Vladimir Lenin. Plait took a picture of the liquid Lenin and uses it illustrate his contention that, though objects on the surface of Mars can sometimes take on interesting shapes, they are just a bunch of rocks. Hoagland's claims irritate me because he is promoting uncritical thinking, Plait told SPACE.com . He doesn't want you to think about what you're seeing. He's trying to bamboozle you into believing what he's saying. Critical thinking is the foundation of science, but Plait thinks it's also an important skill for anyone trying to navigate modern society. Hoagland is eroding away at that ability. Hoagland says the names given to objects shown on his web site are nicknames, just as the rover scientists came up with blueberries to describe small spherical objects on Mars. We are not saying there are stoves or pistons on Mars, Hoagland said in a telephone interview. Absolutely not. When we began looking at these objects, what struck us was how remarkably symmetrical, how remarkably designed-looking, how remarkably manufactured some of these things looked. Hoagland's web site, however, does not make this distinction with many rover images. A headline on the home page flatly states that some objects on Mars are non-natural: Spirit Sees (and Still Ignores) More Artificial Junk. And the caption to one reads, plainly, an Unmistakable Machined Fitting. Another caption reads: When is a Rock Not a Rock? When They Come in pairs! And another: A Collection of Mechanical Bits. Hoagland said he suggested to scientists on the rover team that they go study the objects up close to determine their composition. NASA chose not to, he said. So we have a hanging mystery. We don't know what these things are. We'll never know what these things are. Hoagland is routinely critical of Stephen Squyres, a Cornell University astronomer who is mission manager for the Mars rover mission. Squyres did not respond to a SPACE.com query regarding Hoagland's claims. It should be pointed out that NASA is not in the practice of commanding its rovers based on suggestions from people outside the agency or from beyond the Spirit and Opportunity science teams, which together include dozens of leading geologists and other scientists from inside the agency and from universities around the country. 'Pseudoscience' Philip Plait is an astronomer who develops space-related classroom materials at Sonoma State University in California and also works in public outreach on various NASA missions. He spends his spare time working to right the cosmic wrongs -- big and small -- promulgated by the popular media and around the Internet. He is frequently invited to talk to large gatherings of astronomers, who appreciate his efforts to correct mistakes in the popular media. Lately, Plait has heard Hoagland explain his views frequently on the late-night Coast to Coast AM radio show, which is heard on hundreds of stations. Meanwhile, a phenomenal flow of images from NASA's Mars rovers has created a cottage industry in scientific speculation about the red planet, at Hoagland's web site and elsewhere. I've let this fester long enough, Plait wrote recently on his web site, badastronomy.com. This kind of pseudoscience is like a virus. At low
Re: New Pentagon Papers Author
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 9:55 AM Subject: New Pentagon Papers Author The Weekly Stanard does a few quick excerpts from the oeuvre of the author of the New Pentagon Papers: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/849czxps.asp So, Doug, I think you were the person who posted how important these were to the list. How do you feel about endorsing this person's views? My own personal favorite would be, from the article: Kwiatkowski accused the Pentagon of planning to 'build greater Zion' in the Middle East and decried the 'Zionist political cult that has lassoed the E-Ring' This lunatic, by the way, has been favorably quoted by Ted Kennedy. What is it about opposing the war and being an anti-semite? I mean, I understand why anti-semites opposed the war, that makes perfect sense to me. But how did otherwise reasonable people decide that anti-semitism in other people who thought the war shouldn't happen was okay, as long as you agreed on that? There is also the possibility that her anti-Semitic views written under pseudonyms were not traced to her when her criticism was quoted. It is very reasonable, since she making those statements under a pseudonym, to consider the rest of her report questionable at best. I think Doug using her as a source without realizing that she wrote anti-Semitic crap under a pseudonym is perfectly excusable as an honest mistake. Kennedy's staff should be very embarrassed that they didn't vet her before quoting her. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
TA and Sci-Fi was Re: Stargate SG-1
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... Stargate: Atlantis was geared more toward the younger audience than SG-1 currently has and is using younger actors and more action oriented storylines, not to mention the TA factor to a greater degree than SG-1 did. It's a goner...!! TA automatically takes it out of the serious Sci- fi genre, Can explain why. TA has allways been a big part of Sci-Fi and Sci-Fi fandom. So much so, that furrism is a direct offshoot of sci-fi fandom. There was a lot more skin back in the STOS days. Kirk was getting some way more often that Archer. Even Picard and Rieker were getting it more than Archer. If anything, I would think that SG1 has way too little TA to be serious Sci-Fi ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
On 15 Mar 2004, at 11:16 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The bottom line - Don't let gays destroy marriage - that's the job of the Republicans! Looking deeper, this is nothing more that Serial Polygamy. The only difference is the time line it occurs. There are laws against parallel polygamy, but not serial polygamy. You are right... Its hypocritical to act as if gay Marriage is wrong for biblical reasons, yet they do not hold themselves to the same biblical standards. If they truly support traditional, culturally acceptable, biblically correct marriage, they would allow other forms of marriage including parallel polygamy. Because they do NOT, they have no basis in which to judge other forms of marriage. Nerd From Hell That would be the Catholic interpretation of Christianity. Didn't the schisms start with Henry VIII's desire to get divorced several times? That or execute those pesky exes :) -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Mac OS X is a rock-solid system that's beautifully designed. I much prefer it to Linux. - Bill Joy. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: TA and Sci-Fi was Re: Stargate SG-1
In a message dated 3/15/2004 6:08:30 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There was a lot more skin back in the STOS days. Kirk was getting some way more often that Archer. Even Picard and Rieker were getting it more than Archer. ...must control evil urge. take moral high ground losing inner battle. must say it... Cheesewiz! Vilyehm Teighlore ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
- Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 7:23 PM Subject: Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE On 15 Mar 2004, at 11:16 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The bottom line - Don't let gays destroy marriage - that's the job of the Republicans! Looking deeper, this is nothing more that Serial Polygamy. The only difference is the time line it occurs. There are laws against parallel polygamy, but not serial polygamy. You are right... Its hypocritical to act as if gay Marriage is wrong for biblical reasons, yet they do not hold themselves to the same biblical standards. If they truly support traditional, culturally acceptable, biblically correct marriage, they would allow other forms of marriage including parallel polygamy. Because they do NOT, they have no basis in which to judge other forms of marriage. Nerd From Hell That would be the Catholic interpretation of Christianity. Didn't the schisms start with Henry VIII's desire to get divorced several times? That or execute those pesky exes :) It would also, by and large, be the Protestant version of Christianity. (At least in regards to marriage) Protestants are, in general, against divorce, the exception being when you yourself desire one. Despite history. xponent The Obvious Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: New Pentagon Papers Author
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 9:55 AM Subject: New Pentagon Papers Author The Weekly Stanard does a few quick excerpts from the oeuvre of the author of the New Pentagon Papers: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/849c zxps.asp So, Doug, I think you were the person who posted how important these were to the list. How do you feel about endorsing this person's views? My own personal favorite would be, from the article: Kwiatkowski accused the Pentagon of planning to 'build greater Zion' in the Middle East and decried the 'Zionist political cult that has lassoed the E-Ring' This lunatic, by the way, has been favorably quoted by Ted Kennedy. What is it about opposing the war and being an anti-semite? I mean, I understand why anti-semites opposed the war, that makes perfect sense to me. But how did otherwise reasonable people decide that anti-semitism in other people who thought the war shouldn't happen was okay, as long as you agreed on that? There is also the possibility that her anti-Semitic views written under pseudonyms were not traced to her when her criticism was quoted. It is very reasonable, since she making those statements under a pseudonym, to consider the rest of her report questionable at best. I think Doug using her as a source without realizing that she wrote anti-Semitic crap under a pseudonym is perfectly excusable as an honest mistake. Kennedy's staff should be very embarrassed that they didn't vet her before quoting her. Does anyone have a link to one of these A-S articles that she wrote. This is a lot of talk without even quotes to back up the supposed A-S- ness of the articles. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Stargate SG-1
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 7:55 PM Subject: RE: Stargate SG-1 ... Stargate: Atlantis was geared more toward the younger audience than SG-1 currently has and is using younger actors and more action oriented storylines, not to mention the TA factor to a greater degree than SG-1 did. It's a goner...!! TA automatically takes it out of the serious Sci-fi genre, into an Aaron Spelling-isk drama... Enterprise is riding that line... BTW anyone see the Enterprise Season Final? Enterprise is getting its ass kicked... Very cool. Nerd from Hell ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Yeh saw that, however thats not the final for this season, there are i think 5 more episodes for this season that are still in production. and there are another 5 weeks worth of repeats B4 those are even going to air. and yes more TA in Stargate would be nice, perhaps good old RDA hooking up with some sweet alien loving like kirk... I mean was their a alien Kirk didnt do? I stand on the threshold of tommorow, atop the stairway of yesterday, holding the key to today, staring through the door into the future. -Nick Lidster 26 May 2003 http://capelites.no-ip.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Humor: REM meets LotR
Got pointed to this on theonering.net, and I thought it was pretty clever. http://greenbooks.theonering.net/moonletters/creative/files/s081503_09.html Sung to the tune of It's the End of the World as we Know It by R.E.M. That's great it starts with a dwarf quest, Orcs and Wargs, a riddle game. A Hobbit thief is not afraid. ...and so on. I figured a few of our musically-inclined friends might enjoy it. Jim ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: Adult Stem Cell Depletion linked to Heart Disease
http://news.mc.duke.edu/news/article.php?id=7451 Progenitor Cells Predict Heart Disease Severity Where did they get cells from Progenitors! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fwd: New Distant 'Planetoid' Seen in Our Solar System
At 04:46 PM 3/15/2004, you wrote: New Distant 'Planetoid' Seen in Our Solar System WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A newly discovered dark and frigid world, a bit smaller than Pluto and three times farther away, has emerged as the most distant object in the solar system, astronomers said on Monday. The new planetoid, named Sedna after an Inuit goddess who created the sea creatures of the Arctic, is by far the coldest and most distant object known to orbit the sun, a team of researchers announced. I thought that was my last girlfriend. Kevin T. - VRWC I'm here all week; please tip the waitresses ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
That would be the Catholic interpretation of Christianity. Didn't the schisms start with Henry VIII's desire to get divorced several times? That or execute those pesky exes :) Nope. It started some 500 years earlier over disputes over papal supremacy... Damon, why does the Eastern Orthodox get the short end? = Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Stargate SG-1
I stand on the threshold of tommorow, atop the stairway of yesterday, holding the key to today, staring through the door into the future. -Nick Lidster 26 May 2003 Have you said, has anyone asked, why you list that date? It's my favorite day of any year. Kevin T. - VRWC I watch Hellfighters to celebrate ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Enterprise - was: Stargate SG-1
On Mar 15, 2004, at 4:25 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] BTW anyone see the Enterprise Season Final? Enterprise is getting its ass kicked... Very cool. My local station decided to pull it for the current season, the bastards! Is Enterprise being carried on UPN? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: New Pentagon Papers Author
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is also the possibility that her anti-Semitic views written under pseudonyms were not traced to her when her criticism was quoted. It is very reasonable, since she making those statements under a pseudonym, to consider the rest of her report questionable at best. I think Doug using her as a source without realizing that she wrote anti-Semitic crap under a pseudonym is perfectly excusable as an honest mistake. Kennedy's staff should be very embarrassed that they didn't vet her before quoting her. Dan M. No, I'm sure Doug didn't know. I don't have any problem with that. You have to be fairly batty (i.e., me) to follow politics with enough detail to have known who she was. But when you go to a source like that, and invest it with such authority, I think it should make you question the premises that led you to it. If I started quoting someone who turned out to be a John Bircher with such enthusiasm, it would definitely make me worry about what I believed. As for Kennedy's staff - why should they be embarassed? The 2000 nominee for President of the Democratic Party has accused the President of the United States of betraying - and that is a quote - the United States. Kennedy has made similarly hyperbolic claims. It doesn't surprise me in the least that Kennedy is relying on people like this. He might even agree. I would also say, by the way - could you find a quote from Bush or Cheney saying such things about their opponents? You most certainly could not. Anyone who has the gall to claim that Bush is questioning people's patriotism or running a mean-spirited campaign damn well better be able to explain that. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
At 05:47 PM 3/15/2004, you wrote: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE snip The bottom line - Don't let gays destroy marriage - that's the job of the Republicans! rob I know how this game is played! If I wasn't in the military, I can't have an opinion about it. If I was in the military, but never saw combat, then I can't have an opinion about war. Since I'm white, I can't be against affirmative action or other similar measures since I don't know what it feels like to be repressed.. Since I'm not a woman, I can't have an opinion on reproductive rights. Since I'm not rich, I can't be for a tax cut. These people have a certain opinion about marriage and it's not all based on religious grounds; I know my opinion isn't. But even if it is, one does not exclude the other. Where is John Kerry's name? He's against gay marriage (this week) and has a divorce. Oh, he tried to get that annulled...after some odd years and two children. Kevin T. - VRWC But this is my favorite Judas Priest album...don't like the song though ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: New Pentagon Papers Author
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 8:50 PM Subject: Re: New Pentagon Papers Author I would also say, by the way - could you find a quote from Bush or Cheney saying such things about their opponents? You most certainly could not. Anyone who has the gall to claim that Bush is questioning people's patriotism or running a mean-spirited campaign damn well better be able to explain that. Technically, probably not. But, do you think when Republican leaders accuse the Democrats of giving aid and comfort to the enemy it is only because they are going against the wishes of Bush? Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
- Original Message - From: Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 8:53 PM Subject: Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE At 05:47 PM 3/15/2004, you wrote: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE snip The bottom line - Don't let gays destroy marriage - that's the job of the Republicans! rob I know how this game is played! If I wasn't in the military, I can't have an opinion about it. If I was in the military, but never saw combat, then I can't have an opinion about war. Since I'm white, I can't be against affirmative action or other similar measures since I don't know what it feels like to be repressed.. Since I'm not a woman, I can't have an opinion on reproductive rights. Since I'm not rich, I can't be for a tax cut. These people have a certain opinion about marriage and it's not all based on religious grounds; I know my opinion isn't. But even if it is, one does not exclude the other. Where is John Kerry's name? He's against gay marriage (this week) and has a divorce. Oh, he tried to get that annulled...after some odd years and two children. E-mail glurges can't be expected to be factual or to even make a whole lot of sense. Sometimes they are just funny or silly or thought provoking, but rarely are they ever accurate. xponent Shake Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Fwd: New Distant 'Planetoid' Seen in Our Solar System
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] New Distant 'Planetoid' Seen in Our Solar System This article says planetoid, but I've seen others referring to it as a 10th planet. But as I've heard it, some people think Pluto is too small to be called a planet, which would make this new one even more debatable. Is there some real consideration that planetoid will officially be considered a planet, or was it just newspaper cluelessness? -bryon _ Store more e-mails with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage 4 plans to choose from! http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
JP (Was: Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE)
From: Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kevin T. - VRWC But this is my favorite Judas Priest album...don't like the song though You mean Defenders of the Faith? Awesome album, definitely my favorite by Priest. _ Create a Job Alert on MSN Careers and enter for a chance to win $1000! http://msn.careerbuilder.com/promo/kaday.htm?siteid=CBMSN_1Ksc_extcmp=JS_JASweep_MSNHotm2 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
Where is John Kerry's name? He's against gay marriage (this week) and has a divorce. Oh, he tried to get that annulled...after some odd years and two children. John Kerry may be against gay marriage, but he is not proposing a useless constitutional amendment in order to appear to be defending some nonsensical, ahistorical view of marriage in order to pander to a mostly evangelical conservative Christian base. He's not being hypocritical on this, the way all those Republicans who piled on Clinton when they were all unfaithful themselves had been. Just like defenders of Bush try to point out that Clinton was also a draft-dodger. Perhaps, but Clinton didn't go around posing like a macho idiot or lie to the American people in order to launch an aggressive war of conquest. The Republicans are being hypocritical on the issue of gay marriage. They don't give a damn about marriage, they either hate gays or want to pander to people who hate gays, or both. -- Tom Beck my LiveJournal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/tomfodw/ I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never thought I'd see the last. - Dr. Jerry Pournelle -- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
At 10:36 PM 3/15/2004 -0500 Tom Beck wrote: John Kerry may be against gay marriage, but he is not proposing a useless constitutional amendment in order to appear to be defending some nonsensical, ahistorical view of marriage in order to pander to a mostly evangelical conservative Christian base. He's not being hypocritical on this, the way all those Republicans who piled on Clinton when they were all unfaithful themselves had been. I can't believe that I am being sucked into this moronic thread. Unfortuantely, the sheer inability of people here to understand conservatives continues to astound. Anyhow. 1) Believing in the sanctity of marriage does not require believing that divorce should be outlawed. Opposition to gay marriage and one's belief on the appropriate standards and frequency of divorces are not connected in any necessary way. 2) !!!BILL CLINTON WAS IMPEACHED FOR PERJURY, NOT ADULTERY!!! Shouting Fully Intentional - Since in What, Six Years?, the Truth Has Yet to Sink In 3) John Kerry supports amending the Massachusetts State Constitution to outlaw gay marriage. if that isn't pandering, then panda's aren't red, black, and white. A big giant THANK YOU to Robert Seeburger for posting the flame-bait to Brin-L. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
JP (Was: Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE)
Bryon Daly wrote: From: Kevin Tarr But this is my favorite Judas Priest album... You mean Defenders of the Faith? Awesome album, definitely my favorite by Priest. I'm more of a Sad Wings of Destiny guy myself. Jim Victim of Changes Maru ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
2) !!!BILL CLINTON WAS IMPEACHED FOR PERJURY, NOT ADULTERY!!! Shouting Fully Intentional - Since in What, Six Years?, the Truth Has Yet to Sink In Fine. Can we, by the same logic, impeach George W. Bush for lying about the WMD? -- Tom Beck my LiveJournal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/tomfodw/ I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never thought I'd see the last. - Dr. Jerry Pournelle -- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
Tom Beck wrote: 2) !!!BILL CLINTON WAS IMPEACHED FOR PERJURY, NOT ADULTERY!!! Shouting Fully Intentional - Since in What, Six Years?, the Truth Has Yet to Sink In Fine. Can we, by the same logic, impeach George W. Bush for lying about the WMD? Did he do it under oath in a court of law? BTW, I've heard that the greatest divide for being for or against gay marriage is generational. Can anyone find stats to support or refute this? Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Lieing under Oath
At 11:25 PM 3/15/2004 -0500 Tom Beck wrote: Fine. Can we, by the same logic, impeach George W. Bush for lying about the WMD? Its not a lie if you personally believe it to be true. And its not perjury if its not under oath. (Note, its still immoral in most cases, just not perjury.) Otherwise Republicans would have impeached Clinton for backing out of the middle class tax cut during his first 100 days in office because, quote, the deficit was bigger than I thought, despite the fact that his own campaign documents were actually pretty conservative in their estimates for the budget deficit. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Stargate SG-1
- Original Message - From: Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 11:02 PM Subject: Re: Stargate SG-1 I stand on the threshold of tommorow, atop the stairway of yesterday, holding the key to today, staring through the door into the future. -Nick Lidster 26 May 2003 Have you said, has anyone asked, why you list that date? It's my favorite day of any year. Kevin T. - VRWC I watch Hellfighters to celebrate Well Kevin That day in particular was like any other to me. Then after recalling some rather intresting things i had a breif flashof what...i cannot say. However after that I was left with that realisation that every decsion that I have made to this point has neither pushed me towards my dreams nor hindered me from reaching them. The only thing that stands as a constant is time, and that is only realitive. So from that point on i decided that i wouldnt just aim for my goals but I would try and grasp at them and just maybe if I can just grab one and hold on to itI would accomplish something.. something that would be great to me. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
Did he do it under oath in a court of law? He lied to Congress while performing a constitutional duty (State of the Union address). I think that's even worse. Clinton should never have been forced to undergo that deposition, as the Paula Jones lawsuit was clearly politically motivated. -- Tom Beck my LiveJournal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/tomfodw/ I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never thought I'd see the last. - Dr. Jerry Pournelle -- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Outsourcing
The following was sent to me as part of new clipping service. Unfortunately, I do not have a link to the original article. Despite the political outcry over the outsourcing of white-collar jobs to such places as India and Ghana, the latest U.S. government data suggest that foreigners outsource far more office work to the United States than American companies send abroad. The value of U.S. exports of legal work, computer programming, telecommunications, banking, engineering, management consulting and other private services jumped to $131.01 billion in 2003, up $8.42 billion from the previous year, the Commerce Department reported Friday. Imports of such private services -- a category that encompasses U.S. outsourcing of call centers and data entry to developing nations, among other things -- hit $77.38 billion for the year, up $7.94 billion from 2002. Measuring imports against exports, the U.S. posted a $53.64 billion surplus last year in trade in private services with the rest of the world. Under government accounting, when a U.S. company opens a technical support center in India that handles inquiries from the U.S., that is considered a U.S. import of services. When a U.S. lawyer in New York does work for a German auto company or a New York investment banker works on a deal for a Japanese company, that is an export of services (Michael M. Phillips, The Wall Street Journal, page A2). ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Gay Marriage Generation Gap
At 10:30 PM 3/15/2004 -0600 Julia Thompson wrote: BTW, I've heard that the greatest divide for being for or against gay marriage is generational. Can anyone find stats to support or refute this? First, I would note that most pollsters are very wary of the volatile of opinions on this issue, and don't consider polling on this issue to be all that reliable. Secondly, this poll is, in fact, of a related question - but a related question that I think does produce a decent proxy. Anyhow; Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling - The issue of same-sex marriage? High School or Less/ Some College/ College Graduate/ All Approve 39% 49% 48% 44% Disapprove 56% 48% 50% 52% DK/No opinion 5% 3% 2% 4% Source: A Washington Post/ABC News poll conducted by telephone March 4-7, 2004, among a random national sample of 1,202 adults. The results have a three percentage point margin of sampling error. 18-30 31-44 45-60 61+ All Approve 36% 54% 41% 45% 44% Disapprove 62% 43% 55% 52% 52% DK/No opinion3% 3%4% 3% 4% Source: A Washington Post/ABC News poll conducted by telephone March 4-7, 2004, among a random national sample of 1,202 adults. The results have a three percentage point margin of sampling error. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: New Pentagon Papers Author
- Original Message - From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 9:09 PM Subject: Re: New Pentagon Papers Author - Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 8:50 PM Subject: Re: New Pentagon Papers Author I would also say, by the way - could you find a quote from Bush or Cheney saying such things about their opponents? You most certainly could not. Anyone who has the gall to claim that Bush is questioning people's patriotism or running a mean-spirited campaign damn well better be able to explain that. Technically, probably not. But, do you think when Republican leaders accuse the Democrats of giving aid and comfort to the enemy it is only because they are going against the wishes of Bush? Dan M. Let me make a suggestion for those of us on both sides of the aisle. Let us agree that both Democrats and Republicans engage in needless hyperbola in demonizing their opponents. We can all get plenty of data to show that one side or the other does that, but if we agree on what appears to me to be a well verified hypothesis, then we can focus more on the issues. Not as though our example will change the politicians, but I think we could have more fun trying to understand the issues. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
- Original Message - From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 10:09 PM Subject: Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE A big giant THANK YOU to Robert Seeburger for posting the flame-bait to Brin-L. 1 If you're going to bitch, at least spell my name correctly. (Unless you're being an ass on purpose, in which case who cares what an ass thinks) Nyah Nyah Nyah! 2 Give some consideration to blaming the person(s) who give(s) in to the temptation. Every little piece of fluff does not deserve serious political consideration and there ***most definitely is*** such a thing as political humor. And remember, no one sucks you into anything, you volunteered. Be a man and admit it and take some responsibility for a change. 3 Have a nice day! :) 4 There is no number 4 5 *Get a grip* just in case your favorite candidate loses. Its a dignity preserving strategy. 6 If something you read is obviously ridiculous, stating so publicly only rattles the cages of the ignorant. You do read this list don't you? 7 There was a number 7, but my dog ate it. 8 42, 82MPH, 6,700Gigavolts, and mice. 9 Context is everything. 10 When all else fails, refer to number 6. xponent Violating Number 6 For The Humor Impaired Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
Mike Lee wrote: Let's say, Kerry wins the US Presidential elections. He is going to dramatically alter the US response to terrorism. Would that too count as a win for Al-Qaeda? They'll think it is. They as in AQ? I am not so sure of that. I know they'll say it, often and loud, but I am not sure they'd think that. And in any case, I'd really rather not take AQ's statements as the barometer of the efficacy of the anti-terrorism efforts. These people kill without compunction, in fact they seem to relish slaughter - I doubt they would worry about misleading those they hate. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Blix Writes a Book
This week's issue of The Economist is particularly outstanding. Among the more notable articles is an accounting of a fascinating study which concluded that human evolution has led to longer female lifespans in recent history. Another article is the following fascinating review of Hans Blix's new book from The Economist. this article speaks for itself and includes lots of juicy tidbits. JDG http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=2498679 Iraq and weapons of mass destruction A disarming tale Mar 11th 2004 From The Economist print edition Without Saddam Hussein's co-operation, it was impossible to be sure that Iraq had dismantled its weapons programme. That was the problem Disarming Iraq: The Search for Weapons of Mass Destruction By Hans Blix Pantheon; 285 pages; $24. Bloomsbury; £16.99 DAYS before America, Britain and the other coalition partners launched their attack on Iraq last year, Hans Blix, the United Nations' chief weapons inspector, met Amr Moussa, the head of the Arab League. Mr Moussa was planning to visit Baghdad in a last-ditch effort to avoid a war. In the end, he never went. But Mr Blix had suggested a two-fold message for the man he dubbed the emperor of Mesopotamia: that the only chance to avoid an onslaught was for Saddam Hussein to make the long-refused strategic decision to tell all about his weapons or weapons programmes; and that, if it came to a fight, Iraq must refrain from any use of chemical or biological weapons. Otherwise, people who now opposed armed action would say the action had been proved justified. In his new book, Mr Blix makes clear that he was one of those who opposed the use of force. He regrets that inspectors were not given more time to try disarming Iraq peacefully. In the light of the subsequent failure to find stocks of chemical or biological weapons, he is critical of George Bush and Tony Blair for over-selling the immediacy of the threat. And he thinks they were anyway wrong to start such a war without explicit UN backing. Yet, as his chat with Mr Moussa showed, and despite finding no more than a few empty chemical shells himself, Mr Blix at the time also had a gut feeling that Iraq still had weapons hidden away and was up to no good. And, for all the frantic attempts by Iraqi officials to fend off force, Mr Blix is clear that they never provided the immediate, active and unconditional co-operation that the Security Council had demanded, unanimously, the previous November in resolution 1441. That resolution had given Iraq a final opportunity to disarm or show what it had done with its weapons. All documents relating to nuclear, chemical, biological and missile programmes and research, whether military or civilian, were to be given up. Iraq failed to do any of this. Its 12,000-page declaration a month later did not answer any of Mr Blix's outstanding questions. Yet most council members still opposed using force. So what had been the point of 1441? And what could more inspections have hoped to achieve? As Mr Blix acknowledges, inspectors would not have been in Iraq at all without the build-up of American and British troops on its borders. Yet Mr Bush had made quite plain to the UN General Assembly in September that his goal was not simply to get inspectors back (after four years' absence), but to ensure Iraq's proper disarmament, with the UN or, if necessary, without it. Thus to America, after 12 years of Iraqi defiance, 1441 was indeed the final ultimatum. Yet the French, concluding that America was now bent on war no matter what, dug in their heels. From his dealings with American officials, Mr Blix saw it differently. Had Saddam Hussein responded, he argues, the military build-up would have been slowed, or stopped. Yet, like France, Germany and Russia, he wanted more time for the inspectors. Force might be contemplated at some point, but not now. Why couldn't these differences be bridged? Mr Blix accepts that the military force built up to pressure Iraq into admitting the inspectors, once at full strength, could not be held indefinitely through the summer heat. He skates more lightly over why the rift in the Security Council became so bitter. The main reason was that the big players had all been through this before. During earlier inspections in the mid-1990s, trust had broken down badly in the council when first Russia and China, then France, tiring of mounting Iraqi intransigence, argued for a switch to less intrusive monitoring and an easing of sanctions so that trade could resume. The inspection regime collapsed. Now the same countries were espousing inspections they had once deemed no longer necessary, in a way that, to American eyes at least, again hindered proper enforcement of Iraq's obligation to disarm. Yet Mr Blix is clear about the main reason why military preparations eventually outpaced fraught diplomacyIraq's own obduracy. It did eventually make the process of inspection easier, and
Re: Race to the Bottom
At 10:44 AM 3/15/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote: Where I disagree is whether the emphasis should be placed on the accelerated increase in the supply of labor vs. a deceleration in the increase of the demand for labor. My arguement is that the labor supply between '80 and '03 has grown less than it did between '57 and '80so that the emphasis should be more on the slowing of the increase in the need for labor than the acceleration of the supply. Yet, your data set the posted earlier contradicts the above. Up until 1984, 10-year growths in the labor force fairly consistently outstrip growths in employment. Subsequent to 1984, the reverse is true... there is consistently a greater 10-year growth in jobs than there is available labor force to fill them. Secondly, despite the aggregate numbers, the immigration numbers suggest to me that there was a strong acceleration in supply of labor at the bottom end of the spectrum. Indeed, the labor shortfall in the numbers you provided in my mind may help explain why we had an immigration boom in the 1990;s. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: Adult Stem Cell Depletion linked to Heart Disease
In a message dated 3/15/2004 7:22:50 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://news.mc.duke.edu/news/article.php?id=7451 Progenitor Cells Predict Heart Disease Severity Where did they get cells from Progenitors! A mile down...er two kilometers below the central peak of that mucking big crater on Jijo. You know, the one with that thin geological layer of strange carbon crystals... William Taylor - Waiting to be proved wrong. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fascist Censorship spreading like Cancer thruout Gov't
The Fool wrote a particular word every paragraph: FUCK FUCK SNIP I've heard claims that men think of sex every x-number of seconds. Is this proof? ;-) __ Steve Sloan . Huntsville, Alabama = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brin-L list pages .. http://www.brin-l.org Science Fiction-themed online store . http://www.sloan3d.com/store Chmeee's 3D Objects http://www.sloan3d.com/chmeee 3D and Drawing Galleries .. http://www.sloansteady.com Software Science Fiction, Science, and Computer Links Science fiction scans . http://www.sloan3d.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE
At 10:53 PM 3/15/04, Robert Seeberger wrote: - Original Message - From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 10:09 PM Subject: Re: DEFENDERS OF THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE A big giant THANK YOU to Robert Seeburger for posting the flame-bait to Brin-L. 1 If you're going to bitch, at least spell my name correctly. Maybe he was hungry and hallucinating what he wanted to eat . . . And remember, no one sucks you into anything, Mmmpfh, mmpfh, MFFPH! -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: New Distant 'Planetoid' Seen in Our Solar System
In a message dated 3/15/2004 8:31:53 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is there some real consideration that planetoid will officially be considered a planet, or was it just newspaper cluelessness? -bryon In the full article I read, the new definition of a planet, as defined by the finders of the object is this: A planet is any body in an orbit where the object's mass is greater than the combined mass of all the other bodies occuping the same general orbit. Making Pluto a planetoid. As to newspaper cluelessness, even the local TV news was calling Sedna a planet. And this is Tucson, damn it! William Taylor ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
