On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 17:27, Rik Tindall wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [not OT] DMCA-like law change in the works
> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 17:09:17 +1200
> From: Rik Tindall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Organization: InfoHelp Services, Canterbury Technology Ltd.
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
> You got that right.
>
> Luuk Paulussen wrote:
> >Please don't use phrases like "I think we'd all agree" when you start
> >talking about things like evolution and fundamentalism.  I think there
> >are a number of people on the list who have would have different
> >opinions (now that we have gone even further off-topic)
>
> Opinions are worthless - except as articulations/creators of reality.
>
> The reality is that fundamentalist anti-evolutionaries are the
> terror-producing preface to 9/11 & worse.
>
> Until we face up to and deal with the theoretical garbage (truth = 'God
> told me' - Why? - 'because he made me') in our global "Christian"
> society, our comprehension of the horror we're seeing on the 6pm news
> won't progress beyond Sesame Street.
>
> JC exposed the Middle East territorial lie & died for it. His message to
> us was to speak out - for the poor & the oppressed - from the natural
> creator within us all. Free Software does this today, and the Third
> World loves it.
>
> Poverty of intellect dressed up as equal 'opinion' is the propaganda of
> the 'free world, free choice'. Most lack that luxury though. We can
> share it, professionally.
>
> As for fantasies about supernatural creation - take them to a Mullah.
> Neither of you articulate truth. This needs to be said, dispassionately.
>
> And I'm really glad I didn't have to write to a newspaper editor to so do.
>
> Thanks immensely guys, for standing in the tradition of a Free Internet.
>
> Long live GNU/Linux
>
> - Rik
>
>
> Resend addition:
>
> Luuk, if you require evidence of how widely "opinion" diverges from
> material reality, persevere with your non-standard reply-to. These catch me
> every time! (Oh, for Jim's level of vigilance!)
I also. Is it possible for some munging rule to remove them?

Rik. Whilst I appreciate the arguments you are making, I think we'd all agree 
that vigorous theological discussion is more suited to private email, a 
different list, or perhaps an irc channel. 

-- 
Sincerely etc.,
Christopher Sawtell

Reply via email to