arachne-digest Saturday, January 11 2003 Volume 01 : Number 2014
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 09:48:19 From: Alejandro Lieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights On 9 Jan 03 at 20:29, Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote: > Hi All > > ****** From here it is just a hundred miles to Germany and a few hundred > miles to the UK. About 25 German TV-stations can be viewed and they do > give the background to the world news. The UK hides behind decoders to > prevent the 'continentals' viewing Brittish TV... but BBC radio can be > listened to. The BBC is critical, although a bit biased to US point of > view. To US citysens the BBC could open there eyes. BBC can be found on > the internet, short wave and for Europe on medium wave and long wave > broadcast frequencies too. > I received the shortwave transmitions of the BBC for almost 20 years (1962- 1982) in english and in spanish, here in Argentina. Our newsbulletings depended in who was in charge of our goverment. We have TV CCN in spanish, very pro American. It wasn't the same with CNN in english. Some time ago I discovered an excellent place to read international news through internet from the BBC. It's only text news, excellent for ARACHNE a LYNX for Dos. Very speedy downloads. Just go to: http://news.bbc.co.uk/text_only.stm Free good Sans Serif fonts for MS-DOS at: ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/graphics/novafo01.zip http://www.simtel.net/pub/msdos/graphics/novafo01.zip - ---------------------- Ing. Alejandro Lieber Rosario Argentina lima[at]citynet.net.ar - ---------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 10:03:40 From: Alejandro Lieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Stll no unsubscribe[Fwd: Majordomo results] On 11 Jan 03 at 3:25, Sam Ewalt wrote: > > I've been a subscriber to this list since 1996 and I think it's > unconscionable that people haven't been able to unsubscribe for > five months or more. Unsubscribing seems such a trivial function > that it boggles the mind that it goes unfixed. > > It sucks and I can only extend my condolences to those who are > trapped here against their will. I agree. I read this list since 1998, and will continue to do so. I hate spam, and think that if you cannot unsubscribe after 6 months trying, this list must be inmediatly closed, and a new one opened with the really interested persons resubscribed. Free good Sans Serif fonts for MS-DOS at: ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/graphics/novafo01.zip http://www.simtel.net/pub/msdos/graphics/novafo01.zip - ---------------------- Ing. Alejandro Lieber Rosario Argentina lima[at]citynet.net.ar - ---------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 08:46:56 -0500 From: "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: jpegs are back, kind of On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 11:37:24 -0800 (PST), John Vertegaal wrote: > Hi again, > If you're all just as stumped about my video/graphics problem as I am, > perhaps one of you gurus can tell me what the error message: "Invalid SOS > parameters for sequential jpeg" is all about. My webpages load with > these messages, see: "www.coolbikesubuild.com/new.htm" for an example. > Strangely enough when I pull it in off the web, the jpeg still renders > ok, but from inside my own computer all I get is an image ikon; clicking > on it produces only a filename on the next page. > Another question I have is why do I get an image ikon where the gif is > supposed to load further down the page; while clicking on it does produce > an image on the next page. Netscape handles the page "new.htm" just fine, > both from the web and inside my own computer. Hi John, This page with the bike pictures loads and displays quite nicely with my Trident 8900 card and the old 386 and Arachne 1.71r3. So whatever problem you're having is not an Arachne problem per se, but with some aspect of your particular setup. The "invalid parameter" message shows first and then (after considerable cogitation) the image renders. Why not use regular jpegs instead of sequential ones? I think they would display quicker. Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan, USA - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 09:24:47 -0500 From: "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 19:40:07 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote: > Isn't there a "human rights for dummies" which somebody can give to W ? > But would this really help ... see for yourself: > http://ricsi.priv.at/bushbook.jpg I laughed at loud when I saw this! Never noticed the first time I saw this photo in the news. Of course, old W makes polictical milelage out of his intellectual challenges. At a function with William F. Buckley, the erudite conservative writer, Bush said: "Yes, Mr. Buckley and I have some things in common. We both went to Yale. While he was there he wrote a book. And I read one." Bush did manage to graduate from Yale and later got a MBA from Harvard, so he may not be as stupid as he seems at times. He's obvously dsylexic and struggles with word order and formation when he ad libs--but he's not stupid. Also he's an idealist, doing his level best to defend the United States against a very real threat and danger. But he's not seeing the whole picture accurately. Not seeing the whole picture accurately is the great, naive failure of Americans. And I say that as a patriotic American who wants his country to live up to its ideals. The burden of American economic might and military power is troublesome. It would be easier to be Canadian or Austrian or Finnish and not be expected to act on the world stage. Yet if North Korea or Iraq built an atom bomb and either used it to blackmail Europe or Japan or Austrailia or sold it to terrorists who want to blow up Jakarta the world would demand to know how come we didn't do something about it. I'm not saying that America should invade anyone. But, we do have legitimate concerns that the world expects us to do something about because nobody else can. America needs to grow up, learn more about the world and get smarter about how to handle the responsibilities that our global strength imposes on us. ���-�a Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan, USA - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:43:36 +0100 (CET) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) Subject: Stll no unsubscribe[Fwd: Majordomo results] Hi ann! 10 Jan 2003, ann Kiszt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: aK> When you can't stop mail from coming from aK> somewhere, not EVEN WITH A FILTER, delete if header contains arachne.cz ... away it goes aK> doesn't that count as fucking SPAM???? no SPAM is unrequested Mail. But you clearly have subscribed (requested) the mailinglist. anyways I can understand you *very well* and I think it's a shame that Majordomo is still broken !!! And it should have been fixed WAAAAAAAAAAY back ... aK> What do I have to do to get off this list? smash [EMAIL PROTECTED] as long as he doesn't fix it. aK> Employ the troll tactics I've seen online???? depends ... being a troll on the list is a bad idea, because: - - list members can't help you - - list members haven't done anything to you But kicking sales, postmaster, michael etc. hard can possibly help. aK> YES, I have configured filters for every version of the reply to I've aK> ever seen, to no avail. ?? what software are you using ?? I haven't seen anything where you were not able to delete mail which contained a string in the headers ... so simply search for arachne.cz in the mail headers. CU, Ricsi - -- |~)o _ _o Richard Menedetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> {ICQ: 7659421} (PGP) |~\|(__\| -=> If it works, something went wrong <=- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:20:28 +0100 (CET) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) Subject: Comments on the DMCA and te TPCA Hi Samuel! 09 Jan 2003, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: SH> How can one copyright a cartridge? Don't ask me ... ask lexmark SH> Unless the container and its components have some unique features and SH> characteristics and component materials which make it quite unlike SH> anything else, then how can it be copyrighted or patented? I'm neither US law expert, nor printer cartdidge expert. But the cartridges contain special chips, whith the sole purpose of making refilling impossible ... maybe these chips are copyrighted ?? just a guess. Or maybe just another case where the DMCA is used to bully people and scare them away ?? SH> It would seem to me that it would be lawful for any manufacturer to SH> copy the ink cartridges designed by their competitors. It seems to me that nobody would be sooooo stupid to finance his own big brother with his own tax money ... guess what is happening in the US right now ?? Bush invented the Department of homeland security (also known as "Big Brother") 170000 people working there, budget of over 35 billion $/year !!!!!! And nobody cares !!! In a normal country millions of people would be on the streets, demanding W to be sent to guantanamo ... (or to any place where he can be kept secure, and where hes boundless dumbness cannot harm the country ....) nothing is happening ... everybody is happy ... and now to the most sick part of all ... Bush is seen as a good president. over 75% of americans think that he does a good job ... Boy ... I can't say how happy I am that I had the luck of not being born in the US ! What has W to do that americans wake up ?? implant chips in every american, and send the brain waves directly to M$ ? <sing> and the laaaand of the freeeee </sing> Back to big brother First move from M$ was to designate Thomas Richey as M$ director for homeland security ... who waits now that W buys software for huge amounts of $$ from M$ And another highly sick part is the `Cyber Security Enhancement Act' (CSEA) a law that IMO clearly violates international Law, and UN law. SH> Sam Heywood CU, Ricsi PS: http://heise.de/ct/03/02/070/ - -- |~)o _ _o Richard Menedetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> {ICQ: 7659421} (PGP) |~\|(__\| -=> The only thing shorter than a weekend is a vacation <=- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:53:54 +0100 (CET) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) Subject: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights Hi Samuel! 10 Jan 2003, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: SH> Here in the US CNN and CBS are viewed by almost everyone as having a SH> very liberal, pro-Democratic Party, bias. WHAT ?????? Than America's journalism problem is EVEN HUGER than I thought !!!!! I don't know CBS, but CNN is the biggest pile of bullshit (sorry ... but true) I have ever seen. They remind me of russian communist TV ... the only difference is that in former Russia Journalist were killed if they did not say what the government wanted them to say, in CNN they shut their mouth up by their own. I never in my life have seen such a biased journalism in my life ... never ever ! SH> I regard the views aired on all of these news networks as being very SH> critical. Joking again ?? Ask yourself why you haven't heared about DMCA, TCPA, human rights violations in the US army, .............. before Sometimes (sorry in advance) americans seem like cattle which blindly follow W to the butcher, without nowing where they are going, and what consequences this will have. Sorry again ... this is only meant as a wakeup call ... SH> Sam Heywood CU, Ricsi - -- |~)o _ _o Richard Menedetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> {ICQ: 7659421} (PGP) |~\|(__\| -=> Are you after my pervert award or what??? <=- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 16:07:44 -0000 From: "Matt, Nic and Wilf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: So, while I'm here... Arachne supports animated GIFs, right? So why don't the ones on this site work- www.ahumanbeing.co.uk ? I can see that they're unusually large (the site's author uses them as an artform). But does anyone know why they appear static and grainy in Arachne whilst certain other browsers cope okay? The site contains many links to pages that consist entirely of large animated gifs (when I say "large" I mean a few tens to a few hundred K). Arachne won't even look at these even if I allow it 4MB for them. Arachne is configured with all the XMS memory and disk cache it could possibly want on this system and also has 70+ K free conventional memory... TIA Matt ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 11:24:32 -0500 (EST) From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Quicker loading pages On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, John Vertegaal wrote: > Thanks for your effort and suggestions Steve, to make my pages load > quicker. New.htm looks just as good on my 14" screen as it did before, > so I did some minor editing and planned to put it on the web as such. > Then I started working on the homepage, but the two bottom pictures at > 150x100 res. took up only 5K ea. and looked terrible even on my screen. > > Now I'm confused. You mentioned 10K for tumbnails. That's a ballpark. Thumbnails can sometimes be up to 20K. > How do you get a > reasonably sharp picture into a small area? I always assumed that a > smaller picture automatically sharpened up. If you take a 640x480 picture and view it at 160x120, it'll look sharp. If you reduce the size of the graphic to 160x120 first, and then view it at that same size, it will all depend on what kind of parameters you incorporated into the size reduction as to how good it looks. One of the problems with that bottom graphic on your front page (I didn't look at the others) is that it seems to have started out at a smaller size, and was then enlarged. Once you "grow" a picture and then shrink it again, it never looks the same. > Furthermore, you mentioned > that your example probably was too low res. for a real-life application. The "low-res" applied to the graphics files you could click on to view, not the inline graphic itself. > Because of my small screen I cannot confirm that. But if I go that > route I have to fall back on my own mangled jpeg to provide the high res. > option, as I only have ftcolor to crop. This may be the best way to go, > or do you know of a freely available cropping program? If there would > be a way to get my onboard video setup working again, I could probably > use Linux. Any advice is greatly appreciated. I haven't used DOS in years, but I seem to recall that qpeg was a good viewer, and Graphic Workshop was pretty good at cropping, shrinking, etc. I'm sure there are better ones. In Linux, I find xv to be a very capable "light-weight" graphics manipulator, and when I need to do something beyond xv's capabilities, I go to gimp. ImageMagick is probably a minor step up from xv, but I find its interface a bit more "clunky." YMMV. - -- Steve Ackman http://twoloonscoffee.com (Need green beans?) http://twovoyagers.com (glass, linux & other stuff) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 17:49:12 -0000 From: "John Sparks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Comments on the DMCA and te TPCA According to The Register, it is chip copying that Lexmark challenged:- http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/28811.html "Lexmark has invoked the controversial Digital Millennium Copyright Act in a legal action against a firm that makes chips that permit third party toner cartridges to work in its printers. " Hope its not illegal to copy text from a web site! John - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 9:17 PM Subject: Re: Comments on the DMCA and te TPCA > Hi List, > a design can be copyrighted on its form, colors, etcetera. > Furthermore: it is not in the interest of Lexmark that the cartridges > will be refilled. You have to know how to refill and hack the > anti-refill measures Lexmark did build in. Telling about this hacking is > illegal... however simple refilling is. > I refill my Xerox printer cartridges too. IMHO this is not illegal > but telling you 'how to do it' might be illegal. > Maybe I tell you some day where to make a little hole in the cartridge > and what kind of ordinary ink is put into that hole by a seringe. > I will not tell you... for I do not like to be arrested if I visit > the United States. > > CU, Bastiaan > > > > On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 16:08:23 -0000, John Sparks wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Arachne List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 4:55 AM > > Subject: Re: Comments on the DMCA and te TPCA > >> On Thu, 09 Jan 2003 19:25:52 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard > > Menedetter) wrote: > > <snip> > >> > Lexmark sued an ink cartrdige refiller for violating the DMCA. > >> > The ink cartrdige is "copyrighted", and the making of lexmark cartridges > > is > >> > illegal accoring to 1201 of the DMCA. > >> > 1201 is the evasion of copyright protection schemes. > > <snip> > >> Unless the container and its components have some > >> unique features and characteristics and component materials which make it > >> quite unlike anything else, then how can it be copyrighted or patented? > > <snip> > > Agreed, but some Lexmark's incorporate the heads in the cartridge and might > > be patented. Even so it would seem strange that what is essentially a refill > > service would be illegal. > > > John > > > --- > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 25/12/02 > > - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 10/01/03 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 12:21:17 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Comments on the DMCA and te TPCA On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:20:28 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote: > Hi Samuel! > 09 Jan 2003, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SH> How can one copyright a cartridge? > Don't ask me ... ask lexmark > SH> Unless the container and its components have some unique features and > SH> characteristics and component materials which make it quite unlike > SH> anything else, then how can it be copyrighted or patented? > I'm neither US law expert, nor printer cartdidge expert. > But the cartridges contain special chips, whith the sole purpose of making > refilling impossible ... maybe these chips are copyrighted ?? just a guess. Even if they were copyrighted or patented there ought not to be a law against one's refilling of his own containers for his own use unless there were some legitimate concerns over safety and environmental hazards involved. > Or maybe just another case where the DMCA is used to bully people and scare > them away ?? This is probably the case. > SH> It would seem to me that it would be lawful for any manufacturer to > SH> copy the ink cartridges designed by their competitors. > It seems to me that nobody would be sooooo stupid to finance his own big > brother with his own tax money ... > guess what is happening in the US right now ?? > Bush invented the Department of homeland security (also known as "Big Brother") > 170000 people working there, budget of over 35 billion $/year !!!!!! > And nobody cares !!! The so-called Big Brother department was created in order to consolidate the functions of several intelligence and law enforcement agencies into one big super-agency. It was created for efficiency reasons, so as to avoid the duplication of the same kind of work by several different agencies and to improve communications and the sharing of information. Nobody cares because anything done for the mere purpose of improving efficiency in government will save the taxpayers some money. > In a normal country millions of people would be on the streets, demanding W to > be sent to guantanamo ... (or to any place where he can be kept secure, and > where hes boundless dumbness cannot harm the country ....) > nothing is happening ... everybody is happy ... > and now to the most sick part of all ... Bush is seen as a good president. > over 75% of americans think that he does a good job ... > Boy ... I can't say how happy I am that I had the luck of not being born in the > US ! > What has W to do that americans wake up ?? > implant chips in every american, and send the brain waves directly to M$ ? > <sing> and the laaaand of the freeeee </sing> > Back to big brother > First move from M$ was to designate Thomas Richey as M$ director for homeland > security ... who waits now that W buys software for huge amounts of $$ from M$ What did Micro$oft have to do with getting Thomas Richey a job? I don't even know who Thomas Richey is. I thought Tom Ridge was the director of Homeland Security. The reason why government and most big corporations use Micro$oft operating $ystem$ and $oftware is that the schools, colleges, and other educational institutions in the US don't offer many courses on alternative operating systems and software. If the government and the corporations would install something else on their systems they would have only a very few employees who would would have any idea of how to work with it. Nearly everyone would have to be re-trained. Very little work would be accomplished during the re-training phase. In the local community colleges around here one will find only one short introductory course on alternative operating systems listed in the course catalogs. The teaching staff will officially discourage the students from becoming very interested in alternative operating systems because they say that area employers seeking to hire people for computer-related jobs are looking only for people who know how to do Micro$oft stuff. Unfortunately this is mostly true. > And another highly sick part is the `Cyber Security Enhancement Act' (CSEA) > a law that IMO clearly violates international Law, and UN law. I have never heard of the "Cyber Security Enhancement Act". If it were something so highly controversial, why don't they talk about it in the news? I watch CNN and Fox News almost every day and I read the newsfeeds from the BBC and the New York Times. Also I read local newspapers at least twice a week. The average citizen cannot keep up with every piece of new legislation that comes around. The citizen trusts the news media to report on all the significant bills. I have recently learned from you that the news media is failing us in this regard. Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser: http://browser.arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 13:18:56 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:53:54 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote: > Hi Samuel! > 10 Jan 2003, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SH> Here in the US CNN and CBS are viewed by almost everyone as having a > SH> very liberal, pro-Democratic Party, bias. > WHAT ?????? > Than America's journalism problem is EVEN HUGER than I thought !!!!! > I don't know CBS, but CNN is the biggest pile of bullshit (sorry ... but true) > I have ever seen. > They remind me of russian communist TV ... the only difference is that in > former Russia Journalist were killed if they did not say what the government > wanted them to say, in CNN they shut their mouth up by their own. In the US if a news reporter does not say what the network wants him to say the network will just fire him. Then he can get an equally well-paying job from another network which has a bias which is more amenable to the reporter's own leanings and opinions. > I never in my life have seen such a biased journalism in my life ... > never ever ! > SH> I regard the views aired on all of these news networks as being very > SH> critical. > Joking again ?? No, I am not joking. They are indeed very critical about what is going on in those areas which they choose to report about. The problem is that they are neglecting to report on some events which many news program viewers regard as highly significant. > Ask yourself why you haven't heared about DMCA, TCPA, human rights violations > in the US army, .............. before The military has a very strict policy against violating the rights of POW's. When military personnel are caught violating the rights of POW's they are appropriately disciplined and punished. Even the Nazi field marshall Rommel was noted for punishing his own troops for violating the rights of allied POW's. For this and other reasons history treats him in a much less unfavorable manner than it does in the case of most of the other Nazi leaders. POW's have the right to complain about their treatment to representatives and investigators from international organizations such as the International Red Cross. If the international organization finds that their rights were violated, there is a legal process whereby they may receive redress. The persons detained in Guantanamo are not classified as POW's. They are "illegal combatants". There are some very fine points of international law outlining the circumstances under which captured personnel must be classified either as POW's or as "illegal combatants". Those of the latter category are not entitled to the same rights they would otherwise enjoy if they were POW's. I had explained this before. > Sometimes (sorry in advance) americans seem like cattle which blindly follow W > to the butcher, without nowing where they are going, and what consequences this > will have. > Sorry again ... this is only meant as a wakeup call ... Americans are not blindly following him. If you would visit the newsgroups devoted to political discussions you will find that there are many Americans who are severely criticising GW Bush. Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser: http://browser.arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 19:36:03 -0000 From: "John Sparks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Keeping track of the news [was Re: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 5:41 AM Subject: Re: Keeping track of the news [was Re: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights <snip> > There are no civilized countries where the citizens are not allowed > to own guns. <snip> My dictionary defines civilize as "... get rid of barbarous habits..." Whilst I do not want to make any claims as to which country is or is not civilised, the only way I can see that owning guns might get rid of barbarous habits is by the citizens acting as an armed police force. That would only be necessary to control potentially bad citizens. Unfortunately they would also have guns! Perhaps the only truly civilised society would be one where everyone was allowed to own weapons but no-one wanted to take up the option. John - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 10/01/03 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 15:04:38 -0500 From: "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Comments on the DMCA and te TPCA On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 14:20:28 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote: > Bush invented the Department of homeland security (also known as "Big Brother") > 170000 people working there, budget of over 35 billion $/year !!!!!! Homeland Security is a new bureaucratic catch all that reassigns many existing departments and governmental bureaus to a new dept and gives them all a new focus. It's not all devoted to Big Brother type activities and it's mostly old jobs being done under a new title. Mostly this is public relations. > Boy ... I can't say how happy I am that I had the luck of not being born in the > US ! Perhaps this is easier for your conscience. I'm proud to be an American, proud of our American democratic ideals and proud of many things that Americans have accomplished in the world, including helping to rebuild Austria with the Marshall Plan after World War II. Of course America has made many blunders. We certainly need more sophisticated leaders--but much of what you see Bush do in public is posturing and politics. I think there is another current in America besides the fear and insecurity provoked by the terrible events of 9-11. A current that has deep respect for freedom and the Bill of Rights. I think this current will reassert itself. Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan, USA - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 20:04:00 -0000 From: "Matt, Nic and Wilf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Keeping track of the news [was Re: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights - ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Sparks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 7:36 PM Subject: Re: Keeping track of the news [was Re: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights > Perhaps the only truly civilised society would be one where everyone was > allowed to own weapons but no-one wanted to take up the option. > > John > Now that's almost worth making into a sig! Thanks for that. Matt ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 15:20:32 -0500 (EST) From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Keeping track of the news [was Re: UT (extreme:): the US and the human rights On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, John Sparks wrote: > <snip> > > There are no civilized countries where the citizens are not allowed > > to own guns. > <snip> > My dictionary defines civilize as "... get rid of barbarous habits..." > Whilst I do not want to make any claims as to which country is or is not > civilised, the only way I can see that owning guns might get rid of > barbarous habits is by the citizens acting as an armed police force. That > would only be necessary to control potentially bad citizens. Unfortunately > they would also have guns! It's a pretty well documented fact that criminals are deterred by the knowledge that potential victims "might be armed." Washington DC has the strictest gun laws in the country, yet also has the highest crime rate. Mexico has strict gun laws and high crime. Even though gun laws are tough and guns scarce, the use of knives, clubs and other weapons of opportunity is rampant. Switzerland is the opposite. Every male between 18 and 45 is required by law to maintain assault rifles, and the crime there is almost non-existent. Several years ago one of the suburbs of Atlanta was having problems with crime, so they passed a very controversial law that everyone must own a gun. Crime dropped 83% within a month of passage. The state of Vermont doesn't even have concealed carry permits. They simplify the "gun issue" to a point of beauty: "Carrying a gun with criminal intent is a crime." Therefore, anyone may arm himself in whatever fashion he wishes, as long as he has no criminal intent. When was the last time you heard of a crime in Vermont? I don't think they ever had one! ;-) Sure, there are exceptions, and a lot more goes into civilized behavior than deterring criminals... but the fact that general gun ownership is a deterrent to criminals (and an effective one at that) can not be disputed. > Perhaps the only truly civilised society would be one where everyone was > allowed to own weapons but no-one wanted to take up the option. Better would be one in which everyone owned a gun, knew how to use it accurately and safely, and thus, never had to. - -- Steve Ackman http://twoloonscoffee.com (Need green beans?) http://twovoyagers.com (glass, linux & other stuff) ------------------------------ End of arachne-digest V1 #2014 ******************************
