Re: christian dreams of murder...
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a message dated 11/14/2003 4:43:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: He's quite clear in the intro that it's a work of fiction. A 'wink wink nod nod' scenario would have been a single line which said 'Of course, I don't support this.' Instead, he wrote three quite honest-sounding paragraphs explaining his position. IMO, you're drawing conclusions that have no evidence to support them. And, just because someone writes something doesn't mean they are advocating it, and to imply they are with (I repeat) _no evidence_ is the worst kind of thought police manipulation of reality. Out of curiosity, do you object to Tom Clancy novels? After all, they contain plausible scenarios by which our country and government heads could be attacked by all sorts of terrorists, resulting in the deaths of millions. You are not seriously comparing this to Clancy are you? Oh my god there really is a conspiracy out there; I have been manuevered into liking Clancy better than something else. Lets get real. This guy is of course a nut, but his fantasy is not a popular fiction it is a wish (kind of like me wishing that Rebecca Romjin would walk into my apartment right now and do unspeakable things to me. Of course I am not planning on this but I do wish it would happen). I am also a bit suprised by the moral relativism that I see here. Some right wing nut says something horrible and a moderate or liberal complains. When the bad thing can't be denied the answer is that all groups do it. This may be true but it matters very much how often all groups do something and how members of the group respond to bad things coming from their group. The statement that everyone strikes out does not mean that Jason Giambi and I are equal. I think the right does it more and excuses itself when it gets caught. We forgive Rush for his little drug problem; poor man was addicted to pain killers and had to get drugs illegally (by the way; I am a doctor and I have serious doubts about how often people get addicted to pain killers because of problems like chronic low back pain. Most people get addicted because they want to get high). No conservative raises an eyebrow about the timing of Rush's decision to enter rehab. Do you think a democrat would get cut the same slack? So enough of this crap. Quit ganging up on the Fool (my god more of the nasty conspiracy - now I am defending the fool). My take on the article: I agree with Jon's assessment that this isn't a wink wink nod nod scenario. On the other hand, the gusto with which he provides the exact details of his little nasty scenario leave me far less than sanguine about this guy. I wouldn't really The problems with The Fool's post, as mentioned by others, are 1) He pulled the quote out of context to remove the surrounding text that moderates it and 2) his subject line further distorts things. For someone who regularly posts articles loudly criticizing the lies and distortions of other assorted groups, I don't think it's unfair to call him on it. As for the stuff about Rush, I really have no opinion as I don't watch/listen to him. I would point out, though, that he's not a politician, just a media pundit (ie: not a government official) and IMHO we have less right to outrage over his private sins than we would for someone in government. In any case, I'd bet that if a Democrat pundit or politician announced some addiction, we'd see Democrats making excuses and cutting slack and Republicans making criticisms. And with Rush, it was the opposite. To me, that's politics as usual, and one of the biggest reasons I hate politics. This brings to mind a pet peeve of mine that drove me crazy, but I've never seen anyone else comment on it... Back during the Clinton era, from day 1 of his presidency, Clinton was constantly being called a pothead for his admitted didn't inhale trial experience. To this day, I still see him called that. But then GWB admits while running for pres that he was a cocaine *user*, which I'd argue is a worse drug, with a worse usage history. The pothead complainers were strangely silent... _ Frustrated with dial-up? Get high-speed for as low as $26.95. https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
Dan Minette wrote: No, as I've never stated you were evil. Did JDG ever call you evil? Dan M. No, but JDG does not post 20 times a day that you are evil. How many times has he called you, personally, evil, as opposed to calling religion evil? Now I'm not excusing his excesses at all, but you can call drugs evil and not mean drug users are evil, right? -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
Jon Gabriel wrote: There is a _huge_ difference in this instance between what you describe and what's on that site. I respectfully suggest you consider re-reading it, because I'm rather surprised you would make this comparison. OK, I read it a third time. You don't see the difference between the two? What I was suggesting is that you dress up both crimes in the same manner (terrible, I would never do it or advocate doing it, etc. etc.) while admitting they have a following in the darker parts of my mind. Comparing the two crimes: molestation and mass murder I think mass murder is the more heinous. Further, the second is a crime that disenfranchises a large segment of the population by killing its leaders. So basically, it's an atrocity, perhaps on the scale of 9/11, perhaps even worse, IMO. Is this where we differ? -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Explanation
Julia asked: Hm. Wondering now: how many religious people on list how many very non-religious people on list how many people have killfiles if killfiles by religious people have primarily non-religious people if killfiles by non-religious people have primarily religious people I have used killfiles once, for just one person. It had nothing to do with religion though ...seemed more to do with blackmail. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Veterans (was Veterens Bushwhacked)
How many veterans on the list? I'll start the count at 1. George A ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: christian dreams of murder...
Jon Gabriel wrote: Out of curiosity, do you object to Tom Clancy novels? Oh, I do. The first book of his I read, one of his characters implied, somewhere in the first 50 pages, that Indira Gandhi was assassinated because India is such an awful place that her own security guards had no choice but to kill her. The officer wound up his rumination with: 'I am so glad I live in a country where I am not forced into killing the man I swore to protect, where I can take pride in my country and its leaders.' That was it. No way on earth was Clancy ever seeing another penny earned by me. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: [Listref] Cocoa antioxidants
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 09:29:10PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote: Have you ever met anyone who makes hot chocolate without SOME form of milk? Whole, 2%, skim, dry milk, something besides water? Darn ivory tower research! :-) I tried it once, actually. I managed to drink half the mug's worth I'd made. I don't recommend it, but if anyone wants to find out first-hand just why I wouldn't recommend it, go ahead, and then report back to us. :) I'll stand on your research, thank you! Actually, I was thinking after I posted it that maybe some Atkin's diet people may do it. Too many carbs in milk, you know. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fox News, we distort, you comply.
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just wondering if you have read Al Frankin's new book. As you know he pretty much takes apart Hannity and O'Reilly. You should know that Colmes was hired by Hannity to be his liberal foil. Colmes is more centrist than anything else and for the most part he is nothing at all. If this is the bes you can up with as balance at Fox it is pretty much proof that Fox is biased. As to other outlets, I have heard you say this before and I would like to see examples of the supposed bias of CNN and the major networks. Frankin had students at your old school research things like the number of negative stories about Bush and Gore and basically George got a free ride and Al got bashed. Let us also be clear that Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch a avowed conservative whose other outlets include The New York Post. Roger Ailes is (oh excuse me was) an operative of the republican party and Brit Hume has let his personal feelings be publically known in conservative publications (the Standard?. Where is CNN's bias. Does a liberal own NBC? Do the major newreaders on these networks make their political beliefs as apparent as Hume? By the way in Frankin's book a survey of journalists found them to be slightly more liberal than the public on some issues and more conservative on others. See, people who make this argument just have no experience in the business world. I heard Joe Conason say this a couple of days ago, claiming that the fact that NBC is owned by GE - which was run by Jack Welch, a Republican - means that NBC can't have a liberal bias. That mainly reveals the self-importance of the press. Jack Welch has _much more important_ things to do with his time than control NBC. Who gets hired by NBC doesn't even come across his radar screen. Only someone _in_ the media would think that the owners of the media would bother with influencing news coverage. But as for CNN - Ted Turner is much farther to the left than Murdoch is to the right. He thought the September 11th terrorists were brave and claims that Israel commits terrorism against the Palestinians. Find something like that from Murdoch some time. Dick Parsons might be a conservative, but you know, he's not Turner - he's got better things to do with his time than manage CNN's news reports. But if you want CNN bias, pure and simple, how about CNN covering up information for Saddam Hussein? Eason Jordan _publicly admitted in the New York Times_ than CNN did not report stuff that the Hussein regime didn't want them to report. If CNN was half as concerned about anti-American bias as pro-American bias, the reporting out of Iraq would have been a lot different. That's just for starters. Franken's study is so totally at variance with anyone who deals with anyone _in_ the press that it's a joke. I mean, I'm dating a producer at ABC News, and she claims they're totally unbiased - and will also admit that she doesn't think there's a single person she knows there who would describe themselves as conservative. Not even one. You _couldn't be hired there_ if you were, in my opinion, just like most universities. Most surveys say that upwards of _90%_ of reporters vote Democratic. What does that say? Of course Gore got slammed more than Bush in the 2000 campaign. Every Democratic professional I know agrees that Gore ran the most incompetent Presidential campaign since Bush 1992, while Bush ran one that was a model of focus and competence. The media is obsessed with process - they usually can't understand the issues, after all - and the Gore process was pathetically inept. So he got negative coverage. If a Republican had ran Gore's campaign (like, say, Bush 1992) he would have been destroyed by the press. Again, Bob, what you can't handle is that - for the first time in the last 30 years or so - people like me get to participate in the media process now. You can't shut us out of the dialogue anymore. And because of that, because the _people_ agree with us now that they get a chance to hear us, we're winning. Between Fox, the Internet, talk radio, and (most importantly) the people, there are two sides to the conversation now. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While we are being curious, how about a fantasy of government agents laying siege to a religious cult, in the end killing 80 adults and children? If you want a single person, how about a fantasy of a sniper who's a good enough shot to kill a mother and not injure the baby she's holding? Kevin T. - VRWC But Kevin, when a _Democrat_ does it, it's okay. Didn't you know that? It's very important - particularly on this list - to understand that crucial difference. A government sting that ends in the murder by Federal agents of an American citizen holding her baby done at the behest of a liberal Democrat is a worthy exercise of government power protecting Americans. Holding non-citizens captured fighting against American soldiers in Afghanistan prisoner, that's the first sign of fascism when done by a Republican. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Bryon Daly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This brings to mind a pet peeve of mine that drove me crazy, but I've never seen anyone else comment on it... Back during the Clinton era, from day 1 of his presidency, Clinton was constantly being called a pothead for his admitted didn't inhale trial experience. To this day, I still see him called that. But then GWB admits while running for pres that he was a cocaine *user*, which I'd argue is a worse drug, with a worse usage history. The pothead complainers were strangely silent... Just to be clear - he has never made any such admission. He refused to answer the question as to whether he has or has not. Given how frantically the Gore opposition research team was looking for evidence that he had, and how much money they were spending on it, my bet is that he didn't, because it would have come out if he had. I don't really know that, though, it's just my guess. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Slower is Faster
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/14/technology/14super.html SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 13 - I.B.M. plans to introduce a dishwasher-size prototype supercomputer on Friday that the company says will also have broad uses in high-capacity corporate data centers in the future. The machine, Blue Gene/L, will be ranked as the 73rd-fastest computer in the world when a new listing of the 500 fastest computers appears on Sunday at the Supercomputer Conference, I.B.M. executives said. It will be air-cooled, as opposed to many high-performance machines that use water and refrigeration, and it will use no more power than the average home, the executives said. Computer scientists and industry analysts said the Blue Gene/L represented a radical departure from the industry's obsession with ever-faster microprocessor chips. Instead, I.B.M. designers chose to balance computing speed and energy consumption to create a far denser data processing system than had previously been possible. The computer is a component of a vastly larger system being designed for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. That machine, when it is completed in 2005, will have 128 times the power of the current prototype that is capable of a peak speed of about 1.4 trillion mathematical operations a second, I.B.M. said. Today, the world's fastest computer, the Japanese Earth Simulator, has reached speeds of 35.8 trillion calculations a second. The Livermore machine is expected to have a theoretical peak performance of 360 trillion operations a second. In practice, however, supercomputers do not reach peak ratings for actual calculations. Although it will not be a computer for classified applications, the Livermore machine will be a significant step toward a Defense Department goal of creating a computer capable of reaching 1,000 trillion mathematical calculations a second - referred to as a petaflop - by the end of the decade. The prototype has 512 PowerPC 440 microprocessors, which are similar to the I.B.M. 970 processor being used in Apple Computer's G5 Macintosh, but each with a lower clock speed. By lowering the clock speed governing how fast the chip executes calculations, it is possible to pack the processor chips far more closely together. Speed is then made up in other areas of the computing system. This is an extraordinarily well-balanced machine, said William R. Pulleyblank, director for exploratory server systems research at I.B.M. Research in Yorktown Heights, N.Y. The new computer has yet to prove itself for advanced scientific applications, however, Mr. Pulleyblank said that in tests the system had performed better than expected on a range of problems. I.B.M. executives said they had been discussing the new design widely in the computer industry, approaching large corporate users of computing systems for commercial applications, like Internet search engines. Google, the large Internet search company, has been critical of high- powered server computers, saying they consume too much energy and require costly cooling systems. The company has gone to extraordinary lengths to cool its thousands of server computers now used in data centers spread around the world. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish than sensible. - Bertrand Russell ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: christian dreams of murder...
--- ritu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh, I do. The first book of his I read, one of his characters implied, somewhere in the first 50 pages, that Indira Gandhi was assassinated because India is such an awful place that her own security guards had no choice but to kill her. The officer wound up his rumination with: 'I am so glad I live in a country where I am not forced into killing the man I swore to protect, where I can take pride in my country and its leaders.' That was it. No way on earth was Clancy ever seeing another penny earned by me. Ritu You're thinking of someone else. I've read every Clancy book except the most recent one and in no book has he ever made such a statement, and I can't imagine that he said that in the most recent one. He's the most arrogant person I've ever met, and he doesn't seem to like India much, but he's never said such a thing. He has discussed the Gandhi assassination, but only in the context that it was the ultimate betrayal from the viewpoint of a Secret Service agent - which is what they think of that assassination, it was a quite accurate portrayal of those thoughts. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
SCOUTED: Blackmail by DoS Attack
Blackmail latest scam for hackers LONDON , England (Reuters) --The rapid growth of broadband home computer connections may be inadvertently fueling what police suspect could be the start of a new crime wave -- cyber-blackmail. As more homes connect to faster delivery systems, their computers are becoming vulnerable to hackers and virus writers who can turn them into zombie machines, ready to carry out any malevolent command. Favorite targets for the extortionists -- many thought to come from Eastern Europe -- have been casinos and retailers. At the end of the day, this is old-fashioned protection racket, just using high-tech, a spokeswoman for Britain's Hi-Tech Crime Unit said. On Wednesday, British cybercrime cops made a plea to companies to report attacks against their Internet businesses after a recent string of incidents with the blackmailing trademark. Police have seen an increase in the number of distributed denial-of-service attacks targeting online businesses. In some cases, the attacks, which can cripple a corporate network with a barrage of bogus data requests, are followed by a demand for money. Online casinos appear to be a favorite target as they do brisk business and many are in the Caribbean, where investigators are poorly equipped to tackle such investigations. In 2001, cyber forensics expert Neil Barrett said his company, Information Risk Management, was working with Internet casinos to shore up their defenses against a spate of attacks. At the time, he said the denial-of-service barrages were followed by demands to pay up or the attacks would continue. He said the attacks appear to have come from organized criminal groups in Eastern Europe and Russia. Police said because of a lack of information from victimized companies, they are unsure whether these are isolated incidents or the start of a new crime wave. Whatever the motive, denial-of-service attacks are on the rise, coinciding with the proliferation of broadband deployment in homes. Security experts believe the increasing number of unsecured home PCs may be a major culprit. New Internet- and e-mail-borne computer infections are hitting home computers, turning them into zombie machines. Such infected machines can be told to send e-mail spam or even be used to initiate or participate in a denial of service attack against another computer. Home broadband computers are going to be the launching point for a majority of these, said Richard Starnes, director of incident response for British telecoms company Cable Wireless and an adviser to Scotland Yard's Computer Crime Unit. Copyright 2003 Reuters. Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/11/13/organized.hacking.reut/index.html ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fox News, we distort, you comply.
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 04:30:59AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: Most surveys say that upwards of _90%_ of reporters vote Democratic. What does that say? Inquisitive, well-informed people vote Democratic? :-) -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
Ritu wrote: Out of curiosity, do you object to Tom Clancy novels? Oh, I do. The first book of his I read, one of his characters implied, But if that was the opinion of a _character_, it does not necessarily mean that it was the opinion of the _author_. somewhere in the first 50 pages, that Indira Gandhi was assassinated because India is such an awful place that her own security guards had no choice but to kill her. The officer wound up his rumination with: 'I am so glad I live in a country where I am not forced into killing the man I swore to protect, where I can take pride in my country and its leaders.' And what did this officer do in the rest of the book? Did he try to kill the president of the USA? :-) Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
Andrew Crystall wrote: So you are also fanatically anti-religious, for some specific religions. I am surrounded by fanatics!!! Anti-religion? No. Anti-scientolgist? YES. Scientology is a *dangerous* UFO Cult Dangerous? In which way? Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued when their predictions didn't come true :-) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 04:41:04AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: A government sting that ends in the murder by Federal agents of an American citizen holding her baby done at the behest of a liberal Democrat is a worthy exercise of government power protecting Americans. Holding non-citizens captured fighting against American soldiers in Afghanistan prisoner, that's the first sign of fascism when done by a Republican. Wake up on the wrong side of bed, Gautam? Is it so difficult to admit that they are BOTH wrong? I haven't seen anyone here trying to excuse the former. The latter, however... -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 04:45:59AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: Just to be clear - he has never made any such admission. He refused to answer the question as to whether he has or has not. This would appear similar to your position on if you don't condemn it, then you tacitly endorse it. Why did he not say, I have never used cocaine becasue it is a dangerous drug that can destroy lives and I want to make that clear. No one should use cocaine. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
At 04:10 AM 11/15/03 +, Andrew Crystall wrote: On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Andrew Crystall wrote: Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway) I have a few on the culture list, because the individuals are scientoligists and made them offensive to me off the list. So you are also fanatically anti-religious, for some specific religions. I am surrounded by fanatics!!! Anti-religion? No. Anti-scientolgist? YES. Scientology is a *dangerous* UFO Cult I didn't realize UFOs were involved. But, then, I've not made a detailed study of it. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
On 15 Nov 2003, at 1:26 pm, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: At 04:10 AM 11/15/03 +, Andrew Crystall wrote: On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Andrew Crystall wrote: Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway) I have a few on the culture list, because the individuals are scientoligists and made them offensive to me off the list. So you are also fanatically anti-religious, for some specific religions. I am surrounded by fanatics!!! Anti-religion? No. Anti-scientolgist? YES. Scientology is a *dangerous* UFO Cult I didn't realize UFOs were involved. But, then, I've not made a detailed study of it. Body hairs are actually alien spies. Apparently, once you get inducted deep enough into Scientology to get told some of the special secrets :) -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again. -George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wake up on the wrong side of bed, Gautam? Is it so difficult to admit that they are BOTH wrong? I haven't seen anyone here trying to excuse the former. The latter, however... -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ Well, I don't actually think that holding people who were fighting against the United States prisoner _is_ wrong. The stunning inability of critics of Guantanamo Bay to suggest anything else that takes into account the difficulties involved is marked. I understand, however, that reasonable people could differ on this issue. But it seems to me that the first (Ruby Ridge, if anyone doesn't know what we are obliquely discussing) - assassinating American citizens - is considerably worse than the second - holding _non-Americans_ prisoner. Yet, oddly enough, we get hysterical condemnations of the second, and not a mention of the first. Let's just say that I think that's noticeable. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 07:26:21AM -0600, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: I didn't realize UFOs were involved. But, then, I've not made a detailed study of it. No one has. THAT's why their unidentified! -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fox News, we distort, you comply.
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 05:38:23AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: Well, most CEOs vote Republican, which suggests that competent, capable people vote Republican. :-) Dishonest, greedy, take advantage of shareholders people, you mean? :-) -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 05:37:36AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: Well, I don't actually think that holding people who were fighting against the United States prisoner _is_ wrong. Exactly my point. How you can justify holding anyone without a fair trial and access to a lawyer is incredible. differ on this issue. But it seems to me that the first (Ruby Ridge, if anyone doesn't know what we are obliquely discussing) - assassinating American citizens - is considerably worse than the second - holding _non-Americans_ prisoner. Yet, oddly enough, we get hysterical condemnations of the second, and not a mention of the first. Let's just say that I think that's noticeable. I'd say some incredible discrimination is noticable. All of them are human. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
At 08:17 AM 11/15/03 -0500, Erik Reuter wrote: On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 04:45:59AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: Just to be clear - he has never made any such admission. He refused to answer the question as to whether he has or has not. This would appear similar to your position on if you don't condemn it, then you tacitly endorse it. Why did he not say, I have never used cocaine becasue it is a dangerous drug that can destroy lives and I want to make that clear. No one should use cocaine. Would that be anything like making a statement to the effect that If you don't condemn getting blow jobs in the office from underlings, you tacitly endorse it, despite the fact that for the average person it can adversely affect your marriage and your job? -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Veterans (was Veterans Bushwhacked)
At 04:36 PM 11/15/03 +0900, G. D. Akin wrote: How many veterans on the list? I'll start the count at 1. 2. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 05:37:36AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: Well, I don't actually think that holding people who were fighting against the United States prisoner _is_ wrong. Exactly my point. How you can justify holding anyone without a fair trial and access to a lawyer is incredible. Because we are _at war_. We didn't give German POWs trials. We didn't give North Korean POWs trials. We were _at war_. These people were captured _on the battlefield_. Because they weren't declared combatants, they actually have _fewer_ rights than POWs. differ on this issue. But it seems to me that the first (Ruby Ridge, if anyone doesn't know what we are obliquely discussing) - assassinating American citizens - is considerably worse than the second - holding _non-Americans_ prisoner. Yet, oddly enough, we get hysterical condemnations of the second, and not a mention of the first. Let's just say that I think that's noticeable. I'd say some incredible discrimination is noticable. All of them are human. Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ Yet the American government is supposed to worry about the rights of _Americans_ first. That's its job. I suppose that you, Erik, would have nice public trials on all of these guys, with lawyers, and published transcripts, and maybe the names and faces of CIA informants published? That's what a full trial would require, after all. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 07:50:43AM -0600, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: Would that be anything like making a statement to the effect that If you don't condemn getting blow jobs in the office from underlings, you tacitly endorse it, despite the fact that for the average person it can adversely affect your marriage and your job? No. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
At 08:55 AM 11/15/03 -0500, Erik Reuter wrote: On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 07:50:43AM -0600, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: Would that be anything like making a statement to the effect that If you don't condemn getting blow jobs in the office from underlings, you tacitly endorse it, despite the fact that for the average person it can adversely affect your marriage and your job? No. Oh, good. blow job = good blow up nose = bad Thank you for clearing that up for me. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
In a message dated 11/14/2003 9:54:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: All right, OK, very well then! -- puts on attentive face with glasses and sits with chin on fist Play ball! Ata girl ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 08:03:07AM -0600, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: Oh, good. blow job = good blow up nose = bad Thank you for clearing that up for me. You're welcome. You may now return to your regularly scheduled blow job. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 05:54:38AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: Because we are _at war_. We didn't give German POWs Yeah, right, Gautam. I won't even bother to argue the at war point, which is laughable, but that you would argue that human rights should be ignored during war is just sad. Yet the American government is supposed to worry about the rights of _Americans_ first. That's its job. I Of course it is, but not by stamping on the rights of everyone else. The means justify the ends doesn't hold water when the ends and the means are not drastically different in human rights abuses employed. suppose that you, Erik, would have nice public trials on all of these guys, with lawyers, and published transcripts, and maybe the names and faces of CIA informants published? I don't know what a nice trial is, but the prisoners should receive the same right to a fair a speedy trial that all people are entitled to. Innocent until proven guilty, you may have forgotten in your war on all non-Americans zeal. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
At 09:30 PM 11/14/2003 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So enough of this crap. Quit ganging up on the Fool (my god more of the nasty conspiracy - now I am defending the fool) If people criticized The Fool for positing an article Jewish dreams of world domination, would you feel the same way? 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: Explanation
At 02:19 PM 11/14/2003 -0600 Julia Thompson wrote: how many religious people on list Very free from my estimation. how many very non-religious people on list Certainly more than the former. how many people have killfiles Well, I would be interested in the results of Jon's proposed poll. if killfiles by religious people have primarily non-religious people if killfiles by non-religious people have primarily religious people Don't know the answer to that one. But I suppose that it is worth noting that perhaps the most virulently anti-religious person on this List obviously hasn't made it into my killfile - so I do not think that the killfile function has a single determining variable. 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: christian dreams of murder...
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know what a nice trial is, but the prisoners should receive the same right to a fair a speedy trial that all people are entitled to. Innocent until proven guilty, you may have forgotten in your war on all non-Americans zeal. Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ If you don't think we're at war, there's a big hole in New York that would argue otherwise. As is usual for people without responsibility - and as I pointed out earlier - you have, once again, ignored any consequences of your beliefs. It must be nice to be able to make every decision so easily. How, exactly, would you do this without destroying American intelligence? Or do you not care? Your position, so far as I can tell, is that we must do something that we are neither legally nor morally obligated to do and have never done in the past. But we _must_ do it now, everyone who disagrees with you is bigoted and evil, and the consequences to these actions in our shattered ability to defend ourselves should be ignored. Have I summarized you fairly? POWs don't get trials. These people _don't even have the rights of POWs_ under every international treaty. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
At 11:25 PM 11/14/2003 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote: No, as I've never stated you were evil. Did JDG ever call you evil? Dan M. No, but JDG does not post 20 times a day that you are evil. How many times has he called you, personally, evil, as opposed to calling religion evil? Now I'm not excusing his excesses at all, but you can call drugs evil and not mean drug users are evil, right? Are you doubting that The Fool thinks that all Christians, Republicans, and conservatives are evil?In particular, are you doubting that The Fool considers me evil? The Fool, after all, has made it quite clear that some points can be made with a wink, wink, nod, nod. 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
[A4P] Change of address
Change of address: As most of you already know, Trent Shipley has transferred the Alliance for Progress Encyclopedia to me. The initial upload suffered from major problems with dead links, which was caused by the fact that filenames were in lower case (ie. filename.htm) while the URLs had both upper and lower case letters (ie. FileName.htm). That problem has now been fixed (I had to convert every URL to all lower case). As of now the Alliance for Progress Encyclopedia is available at http://www.geocities.com/allianceforprogress (update your bookmarks!). It's also still available at Trent's own website, but it should disappear from there within a week or so, leaving only a link to the A4PE's new location. Note that this was a non-exclusive transfer, which means that Trent has reserved the right to copy, extend, or publish his version of The Alliance for Progress Encyclopedia and that he has reserved the right to transfer the Alliance for Progress Encyclopedia to other parties as well. While I don't really expect this to actually happen, it does leave the possibility that you may find different versions of the Alliance for Progress Encyclopedia elsewhere on the Internet. Naturally, I cannot accept any responsibility for the contents of those other sites. (BTW, if you do find other copies elsewhere, please inform me of the URL.) Updates: I am still studying the structure and contents of the A4PE, so it may take a while before you will notice any changes. Contributions, bug reports and other comments are welcome at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Graphics: I'd like to add a front page to the A4PE with some fancy logo. I'd also like something like a banner logo to go on top of at least the main page. If someone here would like to design such graphics, it would be much appreciated. I can not offer any payment for it, but you will be properly credited. Live long and prosper! Matt Lundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ MSN Shopping upgraded for the holidays! Snappier product search... http://shopping.msn.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Fox News, we distort, you comply.
Gautam wrote: Well, most CEOs vote Republican, which suggests that competent, capable people vote Republican. :-) Or that overpaid, pampered leeches vote Republican. Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://aclipscomb.blogspot.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
Ronn wrote: blow job = good blow up nose = bad Exactly. I am fully, 100% in support of blow jobs. I am unequivocably opposed to cocaine. Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://aclipscomb.blogspot.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: [Listref] Cocoa antioxidants
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 09:29:10PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote: Have you ever met anyone who makes hot chocolate without SOME form of milk? Whole, 2%, skim, dry milk, something besides water? Darn ivory tower research! :-) I tried it once, actually. I managed to drink half the mug's worth I'd made. I don't recommend it, but if anyone wants to find out first-hand just why I wouldn't recommend it, go ahead, and then report back to us. :) I'll stand on your research, thank you! Actually, I was thinking after I posted it that maybe some Atkin's diet people may do it. Too many carbs in milk, you know. But they might use heavy whipping cream, more fat, fewer carbs. :) Then again, hot cocoa tends to be sweetened with sugar. Unless they got the diet version using an artificial sweetener, there would be all those sugar carbs. Wonder if the trick of using vanilla extract to sweeten the whipping cream instead of sugar (which is a trick I use if I'm actually buying cream and whipping it myself, as opposed to buying Redi-whip) would work on that? Julia mind (at least, what's left of it) wandering... ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
O.k., I suppose that I have a moral obligation to step in to this discussion, particularly following Dan's observation. As perhaps the author of the most famous killfile in list history (in re: a former listmember) I certainly am not going to bash anyone for setting up a killfile. I think there are many reasonable reasons for doing so. For example, in answer to Erik's question, yes I still have you in my killfile (or more accurately, I have your posts filtered into my spam bin, where if a reply to one of your post's interests me, I can go back and reference the original. As I stated at the time, I have a particular aversion to reading the f word, particularly after a long day at work. And this is not just about you, the only novel I have ever stopped reading was one where the author tossed around the f word like cand. Its just something I don't like, and since you have stated in the strongest possible terms that you will not moderate your language, I have decided that the potential benefit I get from regularly reading your posts is outweighed by the risk and cost of the distaste I might feel from reading your posts. Anyhow, this post is not about you, it is about Doug... and my point is that I certainly defend Doug's right to determine that the distaste he may feel from reading my posts, outweighs the benefits he may get from reading them. With that being said, I would like to apologize to the List for starting this entire thread of discussion. The tagline of mine that started this whole thing was an expression of sheer frustration on my part. Doug has consistently made many posts that are critical of the Bush Administration and its foreign policy, and unfortunately there are only two people on this List who consistently support the Bush Administration and its foreign policy, when Doug killfiles one of them, he effectively immunizes himself from nearly 50% of the criticism that he is likely to receive.In this particular case, I thought that I had some very powerful critiques of Doug's ideas, and it was just very frustrating to realize that he would never see these counterpoints to these ideas, and I cracked and expressed my frustration at a perfectly acceptable publicly. My apologies for that. 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: Explanation
- Original Message - From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:26 AM Subject: Re: Explanation At 04:10 AM 11/15/03 +, Andrew Crystall wrote: On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Andrew Crystall wrote: Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway) I have a few on the culture list, because the individuals are scientoligists and made them offensive to me off the list. So you are also fanatically anti-religious, for some specific religions. I am surrounded by fanatics!!! Anti-religion? No. Anti-scientolgist? YES. Scientology is a *dangerous* UFO Cult I didn't realize UFOs were involved. But, then, I've not made a detailed study of it. I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone know how accurate/inaccurate this is? Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
- Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:40 AM Subject: Re: Explanation I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false religion a religion too? Or if not, how do you tell the false ones from the true ones? And how can more than one be true? In a manner similar to the ability of a photon to be a wave and a particle. ;-) Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued when their predictions didn't come true :-) But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be plenty of room for the defense to be reasonably successful. :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote: On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 08:03:07AM -0600, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: Oh, good. blow job = good blow up nose = bad Thank you for clearing that up for me. You're welcome. You may now return to your regularly scheduled blow job. How many people have them regularly scheduled, anyway? Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, John D. Giorgis wrote: Then again, maybe none of us are perfect. Maybe? I believe that nobody on this list is perfect. I believe that a lot of people on this list are trying, anyway. And some are trying in the other sense of the word. :) And maybe some people are trying in both senses, just not at the same time. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Doug Pensinger wrote: Just out of curiosity, if someone posted a fantasy about molesting a child, saying that the darker parts of his mind imagined it but explaining carefully that he would never advocate such a thing and why, would that be just OK? Posting it here would be inappropriate. Posting it on the web, that might be a different story. Although I've heard of a case where someone got arrested because he wrote something in his private journal (on paper) along those lines. Don't remember how they got hold of his private journal to be reading that. Anything on the web is available for scrutiny and for any reader to interpret it however they want. (It's disingenuous to selectively quote to put a spin on what someone else has on the web, IMO.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Veterans (was Veterans Bushwhacked)
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 07:39:32 -0600, Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:36 PM 11/15/03 +0900, G. D. Akin wrote: How many veterans on the list? I'll start the count at 1. 2. 3 -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Scientology Re: Explanation
At 09:22 AM 11/15/2003 -0600 Dan Minette wrote: I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone know how accurate/inaccurate this is? He never said the above publicly, but years before founding Scientology he made a comment about how founding a religion is the biggest tax break in the world. 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: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 06:22:13AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: If you don't think we're at war, there's a big hole in New York that would argue otherwise. By your definition, which is apparently not the Congress has declared war, but as far as I can tell appears to be that there are some people hostile to the US in the world (or perhaps if there are any US troops engaged in any hostilities overseas?), how many of the last 100 years was America NOT at war? As is usual for people without responsibility - and as I pointed out earlier - you have, once again, ignored any consequences of your beliefs. Ha! It must be nice to be able to make every decision so easily. It must be nice to not care about human rights for anyone who isn't sufficiently like you. we are neither legally nor morally obligated to do and Of course we are morally obligated to extend human rights to humans. That you consistently deny this is very sad. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: christian dreams of murder...
Julia wrote... Although I've heard of a case where someone got arrested because he wrote something in his private journal (on paper) along those lines. Don't remember how they got hold of his private journal to be reading that. I remember the case you are talking about. I think this was here in Ohio. This guy was on probation for a sexual offense against a child and his probation office ran across his journal during a routine home check. His attorney unsuccessfully tried to defend him with the freedom of speech argument. As a citizen, I can appreciate the freedom of speech argument (although I don't condone his subject matter), but as a parent, I am glad they found the journal and locked him back up. Perhaps that is hypocritical, but if I had to choose a position, I choose the position of a concerned parent. Gary ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Week 11 Picks
Just like that, a 6-8 week drops me back to .500 at 72-72. Maybe I should just start flipping coins. Arizona at Cleveland - Yes the Browns are in a bit of disarray after unexpectedly cutting their best WR this week, but a second straight road trip to the East for the Cardinals has to take its toll. Pick: BROWNS Atlanta at New Orleans - Wouldn't you know it, I *finally* pick against the Falcons last week, and they finally win one. Well, I'm going to do the Falcons a favor and pick their opponent, who knows that if they can go on a run, they can still make the playoffs. Pick: SAINTS Baltimore at Miami - The Fish have lost two big ones in a row behind the ineffective Brian Griese, and are coming back home to face a Ravens team led my Anthony Wright at QB. This game may well be played like the old NFL games of 30 years ago, with less than 20 passes from each side. I like the Ravens defense to generate more turnovers, but Miami is at home and is more desperate. Pick: DOLPHINS Houston at Buffalo - This game is a lot like the Redskins game for the Bills.The Texans have no defensive tackles to speak of, and are better passing than running the ball. That plays right into Buffalo's strengths, and even if Eric Moulds does not play, they should run away with this one. Pick: BILLS Jacksonville at Tennessee - The Jaguars got their upset last week, but the Colts had a lot of injuries and were on the road. No way does Tennessee give this one away at home. Pick: TITANS Kansas City at Cincinnati - The Bengals are te chic upset pick here, and I have been touting the Bengals all year, but I have to give the edge to Kansas City coming off the bye.Pick: CHIEFS New York Giants at Philadelphia - The Eagles won Round 1 in New York, and now the Giants are devastated with injuries. The Eagles, as I was saying despite the slow start, are still one of the best teams in the League. Pick: EAGLES St. Louis at Chicago - There is a lot to like about the Bears in this one... the Rams are on grass, Marty Booker is getting healthy, the Bears ostensibly should be able to hang with the Rams offensively (although they haven't shown it this year), and Marshall Faulk still is not playing like Marshall Faulk. Well, last week I chickened out on all the upsets Pick: BEARS UPSET SPECIAL Washington at Carolina - I expect this to be a very interesting game. The Panthers' two losses have come from pass-first teams like Tennessee and Houston that were able to spread out their questionable secondary.On the other hand, the Panthers may have the League's best defensive line, and the Redskins one of the worst offensive lines. Still, the Redskins have played like the Bills on the road this season., but what the hey Pick: REDSKINS NY Jets at Indianapolis - This is the injury bowl. The Jets are banged up on defense, and without Wayne Chrebet. The Colts have many holes on their offensive line, and are without Marvin Harrison and Marcus Pollard. Ouch. Still, Peyton Manning could probably make me look good at WR. Pick: COLTS San Diego at Denver - Flutie magic lives again!!Still, I have to give the edge to the Broncos at home, coming off a bye, and getting Jake Plummer back but Denver's secondary could make Flutie look very good again. Pick: BRONCOS Detroit at Seattle - Not much reason to think that Detroit can win on the road here. Pick: SEAHAWKS Green Bay at Tampa Bay - I'm so happy that we don't have to hear any more silliness about the Bucs having a win one and lose one streak, now that they've lost two in a row. Still, the Bucs won't drop three, will they? Certainly not to a mediocre Packers team. Pick: BUCS Minnesota at Oakland - The Vikings are in California for the second-straight week, but you can't like Rick Mirer's chanes against the University of Minnesota, let alone the Vikings. Pick: VIKINGS Dallas at New England - The Tuna should make it a sweep against his former teams. Pick: COWBOYS Pittsburgh at San Francisco - I don't like the Steelers on the West Coast on a Monday night... and with their running game ineffective, I expect the 49ers to control the ball and keep things away from Hines Ward and Co. Pick: 49ERS ___ 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: Fanatics (was: christian dreams of murder...)
At 01:31 PM 11/14/2003 -0800 Deborah Harrell wrote: --- The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.pandagon.net/archives/1992.htm Murder, Murder WASHINGTON-January 6, 2004. A paramilitary organization calling itself the Christian Liberation Front changed the balance of power in Washington by a pair of brutal attacks this afternoon. snip sigh Please title such articles more accurately. The vast majority of Christians - I'd guess nearly 100% of mainstreamers - would not support, condone or 'secretly applaud' such an act; in fact they'd consider it their civic duty to report knowledge of such action to the authorities. Of course, does anyone actually expect him to do this? 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: [A4P] Change of address
In a message dated 11/15/2003 8:44:17 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 02:05:54AM -0800, Matt Lundstrom wrote: As of now the Alliance for Progress Encyclopedia is available at http://www.geocities.com/allianceforprogress (update your bookmarks!). Done! It is good to know that you are keeping it going. Good work so far! And I do hope that more on the Rousit will become canonical. Though in all probability, David Brin will probably deny ever having read anything at all about the Ahp'Churezz. And get the canon from the Jijo annex of the second edition of GURPS Uplift up ASAP. William Taylor -- And I hope the Krondesfire gets a bigger entry as well. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
JDG wrote: If people criticized The Fool for positing an article Jewish dreams of world domination, would you feel the same way? Why Jewish? Those who are taking steps in World Domination are the Swiss People! They control the money, not the Jews. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
Dan Minette wrote: I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone know how accurate/inaccurate this is? I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a bet with another SF writer about it. He bet that he could create a false religion to make money, like psychology, not long before Scientology started. I wish I knew where I read it, though. __ Steve Sloan . Huntsville, Alabama = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brin-L list pages .. http://www.brin-l.org 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: Fanatics (was: christian dreams of murder...)
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 01:31 PM 11/14/2003 -0800 Deborah Harrell wrote: --- The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.pandagon.net/archives/1992.htm Murder, Murder WASHINGTON-January 6, 2004. A paramilitary organization calling itself the Christian Liberation Front changed the balance of power in Washington by a pair of brutal attacks this afternoon. snip sigh Please title such articles more accurately. The vast majority of Christians - I'd guess nearly 100% of mainstreamers - would not support, condone or 'secretly applaud' such an act; in fact they'd consider it their civic duty to report knowledge of such action to the authorities. Of course, does anyone actually expect him to do this? When people who *agree* with many of his positions are criticizing him, then he should at least consider it. I've tried to explain that what he does (distortions, inacurate characterizations, over-generalizations, over-playing facts, etc.) harms his stance more than it helps it, but he fails to listen to that. Apparantly he doesn't realize that presenting an intelligent person with good facts that are not decorated with exagerations and inflaming material is far more likely to convince the person than presenting exagerations and inflaming material. Posting exagerations and inflaming materials only convinces the intelligent reader that the facts enclosed are probably poor and should be taken with a very large grain of salt. Either he doesn't believe the advice given to him by myself and many others, or he doesn't think that the people on the list are intelligent. Either assumption, IMO, is fatal to the positions he is arguing. Michael Harney [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: we are neither legally nor morally obligated to do and Of course we are morally obligated to extend human rights to humans. That you consistently deny this is very sad. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ See Erik, a key difference between you and me is I tend to say things like reasonable people can differ on this issue and you don't. Reasonable people can differ on this issue. I'm not sure you _are_ at this moment in time - you're not talking like one. But I'm open to being convinced. Actually being civil would be a start. As someone with training in political philosophy, I'm quite skeptical of the concept of human rights. I believe in natural rights. I believe in civil rights. Human rights? Not sure about those. In either case, again, I don't believe that anyone has the right to try to kill me. And I believe that I _do_ have the right to try to protect myself from them. So, Erik, be a reasonable person. How would you deal with the problem? I have a solution - military tribunals. Those are better than the people in Guantanamo have a right to. They are better than North Korean prisoners got in the 1950s (note, btw, that Congress did not declare war then - just so you know). They are actually very fair, with extensive safeguards for the accused. They are supported by legal scholars like Stuart Taylor, and, I believe, Akhil Ammar (not sure about that thought). They are, interestingly enough, what the Administration has proposed. But that appears to not be good enough for you. _So suggest something_. A trial would involve compromising our intelligence sources and surely would lead to the deaths of many people bravely trying to protect the United States. Perhaps that doesn't mean anything to you - I'm not sure. What would you do about it? = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I remember Ruby Ridge and the controversy surrounding it. There was a lot of debate concerning exactly what happened. The range of interpretations that I saw was anything from a mistake under fire to actions that should have ended up with the trial and conviction of the agent involved. I actually don't blame the agent involved much at all. I blame the orders he was given. I don't remember the exact wording, but the HRT was given unique orders that basically told them to shoot to kill everyone they saw up there. Which they did. I remember the standoff with the Branch Davidians, and how the government was chastised for being too hard on terrorists who were planning an action that would kill as many people as killed on 9-11.*** Second guessing the governments actions was fine; it was the anger at even trying to stop these terrorists that was amazing. Private militias, talking about actively opposing the government with illegal arms were defended as true loyal Americans. Dan M. In the Waco case, I don't have a problem with them going after the Branch Davidians, although, as seemed to be routine under Janet Reno, the level of incompetence involved was quite staggering. David Koresh was a bad guy, and there were some horrible things going on out there. What they _should have done_, however, was grab him on his daily early morning job outside the compound. The only explanation I can adduce for the massive raid was to give Reno something to grandstand about. Note, this isn't surprising. Reno made her reputation in Florida (IIRC) prosecuting ridiculous ritual Satanic child abuse cases, all of which have, of course, now been overturned. I'm not sure whether she was simply credulous and believed the claims, or was actually willing to prosecute innocent people for political benefit. But something very wrong happened there. Reno's not alone in this - Jane Swift in Massachusetts (a Republican) refused to pardon people committed on similar spurious charges up there, and that was a disgrace. At any rate, Waco seems to me very different from Ruby Ridge, where they seem to have gone in with a hunting license. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
On 15 Nov 2003, at 5:02 pm, Steve Sloan II wrote: Dan Minette wrote: I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone know how accurate/inaccurate this is? I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a bet with another SF writer about it. He bet that he could create a false religion to make money, like psychology, not long before Scientology started. I wish I knew where I read it, though. He came up with Dianetics first though didn't he? Which is 'like psychology' :) -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone. - Bjarne Stroustrup ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 09:21:34AM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: See Erik, a key difference between you and me is I tend to say things like reasonable people can differ on this issue and you don't. Actucally, the difference is that I don't think it is reasonable to hold an attitude that people unlike me should be denied human rights. So, Gautam, is bigotry reasonable? Is slavery reasonable? Is justice reasonable? In either case, again, I don't believe that anyone has the right to try to kill me. And I believe that I _do_ have the right to try to protect myself from them. The problem is you lump together everyone sufficiently unlike you into the sub-human category and assume, without proof, that they tried to kill you and therefore you can treat them as sub-human. It may be human nature ingrained through millions of years of evolution to treat the other as evil, but we really should be reasonable enough now to realize the problems with that. So, Erik, be a reasonable person. How would you deal with the problem? If it is impossible to give the prisoners are speedy, fair trial because it will endanger US personnel, then the prisoners need to be released. Those are better than the people in Guantanamo have a right to. Spoken like a true bigot. I certainly hope you are never in a position of deciding justice, seeing as how innocent until proven guilty seems to be a meaningless concept to you. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:40 AM Subject: Re: Explanation I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false religion a religion too? Or if not, how do you tell the false ones from the true ones? And how can more than one be true? In a manner similar to the ability of a photon to be a wave and a particle. ;-) I don't think so. A photon can be a wave and a particle in the sense that it behaves like a wave and it behaves like a particle. Clearly these are not mutually exclusive attributes. That it is true that a photon is like a wave does not make it false that it is like a particle. On the other hand, with respect to the claims of religion, for certain claims to be true other claims of other religions do have to be false. So, I don't see the similarity :) -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Those who study history are doomed to repeat it. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
- Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:52 AM Subject: Re: Explanation On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:40 AM Subject: Re: Explanation I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false religion a religion too? Or if not, how do you tell the false ones from the true ones? And how can more than one be true? In a manner similar to the ability of a photon to be a wave and a particle. ;-) I don't think so. A photon can be a wave and a particle in the sense that it behaves like a wave and it behaves like a particle. Clearly these are not mutually exclusive attributes. Actually they are. That it is true that a photon is like a wave does not make it false that it is like a particle. Literally speaking, it certainly does. On the other hand, with respect to the claims of religion, for certain claims to be true other claims of other religions do have to be false. So, I don't see the similarity :) I appreciate that. Let me start a description of the similarities with a question: how can a particle go through two different slits? Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Veterans (was Veterans Bushwhacked)
From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:36 PM 11/15/03 +0900, G. D. Akin wrote: How many veterans on the list? I'll start the count at 1. 2. 3 Not me. (Though my wife, father, step-father, 2 brothers-in-law, and many of our friends and family are). I'm just chiming in to suggest maybe adding what branch of the service you were in, as well. _ Frustrated with dial-up? Get high-speed for as low as $26.95. https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Ruby Ridge..
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:31 AM Subject: Re: christian dreams of murder... I actually don't blame the agent involved much at all. I blame the orders he was given. I don't remember the exact wording, but the HRT was given unique orders that basically told them to shoot to kill everyone they saw up there. Which they did. Are you saying that the report of the official investigation was false, or are you just interpreting it in a far different manner than I do? http://www.byington.org/Carl/ruby/ruby1.htm As far as I can tell, the orders were consistent with SOP for Houston drug enforcement. Dan M. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Ruby Ridge..
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you saying that the report of the official investigation was false, or are you just interpreting it in a far different manner than I do? http://www.byington.org/Carl/ruby/ruby1.htm As far as I can tell, the orders were consistent with SOP for Houston drug enforcement. Dan M. Just from reading the introduction the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team . . . instituted a shoot on sight policy . . .. That's what I was referring to. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:54 AM Subject: Re: christian dreams of murder... , and maybe the names and faces of CIA informants published? The Bush administration is doing a pretty good job of this on their own. xponent In The News Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Ruby Ridge..
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 4:51 PM Subject: Re: Ruby Ridge.. --- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you saying that the report of the official investigation was false, or are you just interpreting it in a far different manner than I do? http://www.byington.org/Carl/ruby/ruby1.htm As far as I can tell, the orders were consistent with SOP for Houston drug enforcement. Dan M. Just from reading the introduction the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team . . . instituted a shoot on sight policy . . .. That's what I was referring to. Rogers explained his initial thoughts about the Rules of Engagement: In this particular situation, after hearing the description of what had taken place, specifically the fire-fight, the loss of a marshal, it was clear to me that there was a shooting situation taking place at this location. It appeared to me that it would have been irresponsible for me to send my agents into the situation without at least giving them a set of rules within the greater framework of the standard FBI rules, that would allow them to defend themselves. With that in mind, I proposed that the rules be that if any adult is seen with a weapon in the vicinity of where this fire-fight took place, of the Weaver cabin, that this individual could be the subject of deadly force... [A]ny child is going to come under standard FBI rules, meaning that if an FBI agent is threatened with death or some other innocent is threatened with death by a child, then clearly that agent could use a weapon to shoot the child... that's the way it's stated, but quite frankly, we try to prevent ourselves from being put in positions where children can threaten us and where we would have to use deadly force. [FN532] When asked if he had considered the possibility that an adult might be seen with a weapon slung on his shoulder or carried in a nonoffensive way, Rogers replied: I went down a bit and it was specifically giving permission to shoot armed adults. This was after an agent got killed in a fire fight. quote Yes, it was considered, and it's always my knowledge that my sniper observers and my other team members are clearly going to make a judgmental call as to whether to employ deadly force, and based upon the training, based upon the experience of these men, I know that they have absolutely the best judgment when it comes to use of deadly force. [FN533] Rogers acknowledged that the Rules of Engagement he proposed specified that any adult with a weapon observed in the vicinity of the Weaver cabin or in the firefight area could and should be the subject of deadly force. [FN534] According to Rogers he discussed this rule with FBI Assistant Director Larry Potts who concurred fully. [FN535] [G.J.] [FN536] Potts considered the information provided by the Marshals Service to be the basis of the proposed Rules of Engagement. He recalled the proposed Rules of Engagement as providing that: Potts considered the information provided by the Marshals Service to be the basis of the proposed Rules of Engagement. He recalled the proposed Rules of Engagement as providing that: Any adult with a weapon who was observed in the vicinity of Randall Weaver's cabin or the fire fight area, COULD be the subject of deadly force. All efforts should be made to avoid any confrontation with children, but if such a confrontation became unavoidable, that faced with the threat of death or grievous bodily harm, the standard FBI use of deadly force policy would be in effect. [FN537] end quote I would agree that, even after an agent was killed in a firefight, this is excessive. I think that some way to address the possibility of a weapon being present in a non-threatening position should have been in the orders. But, that is not the same as a shoot to kill order. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:21 AM Subject: Re: christian dreams of murder... So, Erik, be a reasonable person. How would you deal with the problem? I have a solution - military tribunals. Those are better than the people in Guantanamo have a right to. Maybe not in all cases. One of the problems the government appears to be having in going to trials is that there isn't enough evidence on a lot of the people. So, its quite possible that there are still some people detained who really deserve a fair trial and to be allowed to go home after being found not guilty. They are better than North Korean prisoners got in the 1950s (note, btw, that Congress did not declare war then - just so you know). They are actually very fair, with extensive safeguards for the accused. They are supported by legal scholars like Stuart Taylor, and, I believe, Akhil Ammar (not sure about that thought). They are, interestingly enough, what the Administration has proposed. Yes and no. I've seen Rumsfeld state that no trials are neededthey can be held indefinately without trial until the war on terror ends. The problems with this, compared to a war like WWII, are obvious I think. The war on terror will not end until there are virtually no more terrorists. So, the Rumsfeld is claiming the right to hold people without trial indefinitely. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Bush administration is doing a pretty good job of this on their own. xponent In The News Maru rob A claim for which you have _no_, as in zero, evidence. A lot of people have _claimed_ that the Administration leaked that name - all of them liberals, oddly enough - but no one has provided even a jot of evidence on that topic. What I have heard is that the CIA _itself_ leaked that information. I would also point out that half of Washington has known Valerie Plame was a CIA agent for years, so it's not as if it's a major security breach either. None of this, of course, came out in the press. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 6:33 PM Subject: Re: christian dreams of murder... --- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Bush administration is doing a pretty good job of this on their own. xponent In The News Maru rob A claim for which you have _no_, as in zero, evidence. A lot of people have _claimed_ that the Administration leaked that name - all of them liberals, oddly enough - but no one has provided even a jot of evidence on that topic. I'm missing something. Didn't Robert Novak claim that he got his info from a high administration official? Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes and no. I've seen Rumsfeld state that no trials are neededthey can be held indefinately without trial until the war on terror ends. The problems with this, compared to a war like WWII, are obvious I think. The war on terror will not end until there are virtually no more terrorists. So, the Rumsfeld is claiming the right to hold people without trial indefinitely. Dan M. And this is a real issue. There are a lot of people in that camp who have dedicated their lives to killing Americans en masse. I think there's a real possibility that they are going to be held for a very, very long time. I don't see another solution to the problem. _But_ there is no right of habeas corpus for battlefield captures. Period. None at all. If these guys were Americans, they would have Constitutional protections. They don't. People like Erik can wave their hands and make demands - but they aren't doing the dying or the deciding. Their hysteria is fundamentally a product of immaturity - they are like five years olds who want a diamond ring. Adults have to make choices and understand the consequences on both sides of actions. I _don't know_ for sure what to do here. I don't like keeping people indefinitely. I _really_ don't want to release Al Qaeda agents into the world. Military tribunals seem to me the best compromise. But either way they are prisoners captured on a battlefield fighting without state sponsorship - this makes them illegal combatants and they _don't have_ even the rights of POWs, and nothing even approaching the rights of American citizens. What the hell do we do with these guys? We can't demobilize them. We're probably going to end up with something like mental health hearings - like John Hinckley, we're going to have to decide, at some point, if they're still a danger or not. The minimum morally serious position is to understand that there are serious issues on both sides of this debate. To do any less than that is to demonstrate that you aren't even worth talking to on the topic. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm missing something. Didn't Robert Novak claim that he got his info from a high administration official? Dan M. It has become rather vague since then. We _don't know_ if it was a political appointee, a career civil servant (someone in the SES could also be referred to as a high administration official, for example), or someone else entirely. All we know for sure is that the CIA doesn't seem to have made any effort to preserve her identity - because Novak himself has said that if the CIA had asked him to keep her name confidential (and he _called them to ask_) he would have done so. And they didn't. The only reason, so far as I can tell, that this became an issue at all is that Joe Wilson is a pathetic publicity hound. Which matches the pretty much universal impression of him that I've heard, so it's not exactly a shock. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
Steve Sloan II wrote: I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone know how accurate/inaccurate this is? I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a bet with another SF writer about it. He bet that he could create a false religion to make money, like psychology, not long before Scientology started. I wish I knew where I read it, though. It doesn't make sense: if he believed that the new scam would make him rich, there was no need to bet - unless he did sometime make public that the whole thing was a scam. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
Julia Thompson wrote: Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued when their predictions didn't come true :-) But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be plenty of room for the defense to be reasonably successful. :) You *read* horoscopes??? Is there any listowner available so that I can request that you are banned from the list??? Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
On 15 Nov 2003, at 9:34 pm, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:52 AM Subject: Re: Explanation On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:40 AM Subject: Re: Explanation I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false religion a religion too? Or if not, how do you tell the false ones from the true ones? And how can more than one be true? In a manner similar to the ability of a photon to be a wave and a particle. ;-) I don't think so. A photon can be a wave and a particle in the sense that it behaves like a wave and it behaves like a particle. Clearly these are not mutually exclusive attributes. Actually they are. Not from where I sit. That it is true that a photon is like a wave does not make it false that it is like a particle. Literally speaking, it certainly does. What does literally have to do with anything? You view things through a physics lens and I view things through computer science lens. To me it seems a 'photon' inherits from two abstract classes 'wave' and 'particle' and exhibits polymorphism so that it can be one or the other in different contexts. Utterly unusual. [1] On the other hand, with respect to the claims of religion, for certain claims to be true other claims of other religions do have to be false. So, I don't see the similarity :) I appreciate that. Let me start a description of the similarities with a question: how can a particle go through two different slits? Because its 'wave' methods get called when it does that? [1] Actually I don't like multiple inheritance, so lets say a photon instantiates two different protocols 'wave' and 'particle' :) Or interfaces to use yet another variant of the terminology. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ A bad thing done for a good cause is still a bad thing. It's why so few people slap their political opponents. That, and because slapping looks so silly. - Randy Cohen. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
At 04:33 PM 11/15/2003 -0800 Gautam Mukunda wrote: I would also point out that half of Washington has known Valerie Plame was a CIA agent for years, so it's not as if it's a major security breach either. None of this, of course, came out in the press. Indeed, I am sure that the intelligence services of the rest of the world were *shocked*, shocked I tell you, to learn that the wife of an ambassador was a spy. 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: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 04:43:34PM -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: Their hysteria is fundamentally a product of immaturity - they are like five years olds who want a diamond ring. Adults have to make choices and understand the consequences on both sides of actions. I _don't know_ for sure what to do here. I don't like keeping people indefinitely. I _really_ don't want to release Al Qaeda agents into the world. Military tribunals seem to me the best compromise. But either way they are prisoners captured on a battlefield fighting without state sponsorship - this makes them illegal combatants and they _don't have_ even the rights of POWs, and nothing even approaching the rights of American citizens. What a cowardly and thoughtless attitude. Did you even consider that the US invaded another country, where obviously people were LIVING, and quite likely took among the legitimate prisoners people who believed they were just defending themselves, their families, and their homes? Or maybe people who were hiding or fleeing? I wonder how you would react if an army invaded the US and attacked your home town and took you prisoner. Do you think you should be held indefinitely without a fair trial? Tried by the army's military? What the hell do we do with these guys? We can't demobilize them. Keep telling yourself that. We can't give them a fair trial because their lives aren't as important as American lives, we can't release them because they are guilty until proven innocent, so OF COURSE we are justified in denying them basic rights. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
John D. Giorgis wrote: Secondly, I have begun a post once Look, punk IIRC, I meant that phrase to be a bit more humorous, in an albeit dark way, than it ended up sounding I'm not going to tell you what you were thinking when you posted, but as I recall you later described the depth of your anger when you had posted. but nevertheless, I should not have I done it, and I apologize for that. Apology accepted. For my part, I apologize for my part in said imbroglio. Nevertheless, among the things I have not done is hold a grudge for years, and refused all attempts at an apology since then. I have read no apologies, on list or off, until now. And I believe I've read all your posts. 8^) Then again, maybe none of us are perfect. No, no one is perfect, nor are they expected to be. As I said in my explanation, I have avoided directly responding to you for the benefit of the list and for my own mental health, not because I held a grudge. In fact, I will continue this moratorium for any and all political discussions. Look at it this way. You always get the last word. 8^) Peace ...and harmony. -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Week 11 Picks
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, John D. Giorgis wrote: NY Jets at Indianapolis - This is the injury bowl. The Jets are banged up on defense, and without Wayne Chrebet. The Colts have many holes on their offensive line, and are without Marvin Harrison and Marcus Pollard. Ouch. Still, Peyton Manning could probably make me look good at WR. Pick: COLTS Hey, if I could drop the remote when it landed right in my hand, not just *anyone* could look good at WR, Peyton Manning or not. :) (I told my father-in-law that it wasn't the QB's fault that it was an incomplete pass, that it was entirely the receiver's fault.) Then again, most WRs aren't holding a baby when the pass is thrown Julia he was aiming for well away from the baby, and I'd've blocked it if it had gotten too close ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Julia Thompson wrote: Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued when their predictions didn't come true :-) But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be plenty of room for the defense to be reasonably successful. :) You *read* horoscopes??? Is there any listowner available so that I can request that you are banned from the list??? They're on the same page as other stuff I read. Sometimes I accidentally read the first sentence of one. And I used to read them when I was 10 and didn't really know any better. By the time I was 12, I didn't pay any attention to them. Plus, you can read them for entertainment value, kinda like Nostradamus. :) And sometimes a set of horoscopes can be inconsistent, if some of them refer to other signs, and you can *really* scoff and feel superior to the idiot who wrote it. As for banning from the list, I think that people who claim that the Dean Drive really works are higher on the list than people who read horoscopes to laugh at them. :) Oh, wait, I'm a listowner. Not sure I can ban myself. Nick? Julia who doesn't ever again want to have a RL conversation with someone claiming that the Dean Drive really works ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, John D. Giorgis wrote: At 04:33 PM 11/15/2003 -0800 Gautam Mukunda wrote: I would also point out that half of Washington has known Valerie Plame was a CIA agent for years, so it's not as if it's a major security breach either. None of this, of course, came out in the press. Indeed, I am sure that the intelligence services of the rest of the world were *shocked*, shocked I tell you, to learn that the wife of an ambassador was a spy. That was sarcasm, right? Just checking. (4 hours sleep last night, and no nap today.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,-- This is our credo, it is who we are. Our rights trump any notion of safety and they certianly trump the protection of confidential sources. Because somebody somewhere says we don't _have_ to extend these rights to all human beings doesn't mean we shouldn't. Anyone who has a good sense of history and understands why we are who we are and how we got to be here should understand that. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Where in the above does it say that you have to reside within certian borders to deserve these rights? Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Where in the above does it say that you have to reside within certian borders to deserve these rights? Doug Nowhere. Which is why the Declaration is a wonderful sentiment without force of law. Everyone on earth _should have_ those rights. There are lots of people who want to take them away. Because of that we are forced to make choices. Pretending otherwise is absurd, and arrogant fools can make all the claims of bigotry they want (transferrence, perhaps?) but it doesn't make it any less true. Here's a question for you, if you think the Declaration should guide our actions. You supported Judge Roy Moore, right? Endowed _by their Creator_ with certain inalienable rights... Not so good for separation of church and state, is it? _In fact_, the push to extend rights they do not have to these people is a far greater threat to American civil rights than anything done by the Administration. Make no mistake, these people will be contained. No responsible government would allow anything else. If we put them into the civilian justice system, then the judges and lawyers involved will bend every law, every procedure, to make sure they stay in jail. Those will become precedents that will redound throughout the American justice system. People have natural rights. Those are rights in the state of nature, unenforced and unenforceable. They have civil rights, rights that they get in exchange for giving up their natural rights which are guaranteed by the governments that the people created. Those civil rights are set out in constitutions, like ours. These constitutions have legitimacy when they are created with the consent of the governed. This is why British subjects, for example, have far fewer rights than American citizens (note the crucial difference in wording), yet the British government is no less legitimate than the American one (I suppose Erik will want us to invade Britain next). _In fact_ we have a problem. We have a group of people who are immensely motivated to kill Americans and who have attempted to do so in the past. Our system of justice was not created with people like that in mind. _If it were, our rights would be much smaller_. As even a basic study of constitutional law tells you, American civil rights have fluctuated over time in response to threat. Civil rights during the Civil War were significantly curtailed (far more so than in any period before or since) by the man now hailed as the greatest of all Americans - and rightly so. During the Second World War the American press was generally censored to prevent it from reporting critical data to the enemy - and rightly so again. And this during a time when the press was not adversarial to American interests. Treating terrorists captured on the field of battle in Afghanistan like bank robbers in the US is the fastest way I can think of to erode civil protections in the _American_ judicial system. The reason that we treat them differently is that they are, in fact, different. Might some of them be unjustly imprisoned? Yes, they might well be. Some of them almost certainly are. We undoubtedly killed some innocent people in Afghanistan. That didn't mean the war was not worth fighting. That was an injustice greater than holding people in Guantanamo Bay for a while. But it didn't stop us from doing the necessary thing. If we let these people go, they will go back to killing Americans. If we try them in a fully-fledged public trial, we will destroy our ability to protect ourselves from their compatriots and distort our own justice system. If you choose the second, _then be aware that you are choosing the second_. I would respect that. I wouldn't agree, but I would respect it. When you make a choice, you choose all the consequences of that choice (Lois Bujold, I believe). So the consequence in this case will be simple. Some, perhaps many, innocents will die. That is a virtual certainty. _Are you willing to accept that?_ Maybe you are. That's an absolutist position that has no grounding in law or precedent - and I would say an honest person would admit that as well. But it's an understandable one. This isn't going away. Children close their eyes on the world. Adults have to live with their eyes open. So make your choice. Choose to let them go, and choose all the deaths springing from it. Choose to try them, and choose the deaths and defeats coming from that. Choose to hold them until a better solution presents itself (and note that we have already released some of the people there). Or heck, suggest a different choice - I'd love to hear it. But for God's sake admit what the choices are. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
Re: Christian dreams of murder...
At 09:16 AM 11/15/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote: On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 08:03:07AM -0600, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: Oh, good. blow job = good blow up nose = bad Thank you for clearing that up for me. You're welcome. You may now return to your regularly scheduled blow job. How many people have them regularly scheduled, anyway? Don't people who visit the president in the Oval Office generally have appointments? -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Six Sigma
At 08:59 PM 11/14/03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 11/13/2003 11:55:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 10:54 PM 11/13/03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone help me with a book or list of books to help me get a basic understanding of Six Sigma principles/implementation. Agh - I am surrounded by sick sigmas. My hospital has a major deal with GE to buy almost everything that uses electricity from them. Part of the deal is that they teach us management skills so I am Six Sigmad CAP (Change acceleration projected_ and Worked Out. Ronn wrote- FWIW, the quote about 3.4 errors/million came from the GE intro page which popped up in a Google search. Admittedly, I was wondering why you were looking for the info, given what I know of your profession. I wondered if perhaps someone had come up with a six-sigma program for the medical profession, e,g., a goal that there would be no more than 3.4 negative outcomes per million hospital admissions, or something . . . I am going to be doing some work for a company that uses Six Sigma, and need to have a basic understanding of the principles/process. Lately, I am not always in a place to be on the computer and have several hours where a book fills the time nicely. From what I have read so far the Six Sigma approach can be applied to manufacturing, admin or service sectors. Healthcare is considered service sector and reality is that it is a business. Quality is harder to measure in hospitals, etc- for instance it is difficult to determine productivity all the time with people who are not predictable, or varying perceptions of quality or patient care widgets are quite a bit more predictable. I don't usually work in conventional hospital settings, and spend more time than the average PT in industry. I had a chance to spend time doing some teaching this spring at a hospital in Maryville, MO, where they did something neat. They are the first health care group to receive the Baldrige Quality Award (not that I knew what that was until they told me- it is usually given to manufacturing, etc). This is a small hospital, but they were incredible- housekeepers making sure patients were comfortable, ER with less than 15-30 min wait, and they were starting on demand meals (think room service). The staff didn't grumble or think this was out of the ordinary- talk about a quality culture. Maybe 3.4 is not such an off the wall thing (grin). Dee ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
List of Veterans on the List (was Re: Veterans (was Veterans Bushwhacked))
At 04:41 PM 11/15/03 -0500, Bryon Daly wrote: From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:36 PM 11/15/03 +0900, G. D. Akin wrote: How many veterans on the list? I'll start the count at 1. 2. 3 Not me. (Though my wife, father, step-father, 2 brothers-in-law, and many of our friends and family are). I'm just chiming in to suggest maybe adding what branch of the service you were in, as well. How's this? (Feel free to add names or details as appropriate): 1. G. D. Akin 2. Ronn! Blankenship USAF, O1 - O2, 1976-1979, Systems Engineer (= responsible for miscellaneous stuff no one could put a name to), 6514th Test Squadron (later 6545th Test Group), which was responsible for the testing of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), including all three versions of cruise missiles (air-launched AGM-86/ALCM, sea-launched Tomahawk, and ground-launched GLCM) as well as some early versions of some of the stuff used in Iraq in 1991 and recently. Got out a bit early to go back to school and work on my doctorate after I determined that being in the USAF wasn't going to guarantee me a slot in the astronaut program, either . . . 3. Doug Pensinger Sub sailor, USS Narwhal, SSN 671, Nuke fast attack, based in New London and in the yards in Charlston. E6 Sonar Tech, 1974 to 1980. 4. Damon Agretto -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false religion a religion too? Or if not, how do you tell the false ones from the true ones? And how can more than one be true? Why does it have to be a false religion. I've always thought a cult was where the members no longer operated within the accepted norms of the community within which they live - whether it is a religious thing, a cyberpunk thing, a doomsday thing or even a political extremist thing... Obviously the definition is a bit open... Cheers Russell C. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
At 03:34 PM 11/15/03 -0600, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:52 AM Subject: Re: Explanation On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:40 AM Subject: Re: Explanation I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false religion a religion too? Or if not, how do you tell the false ones from the true ones? And how can more than one be true? In a manner similar to the ability of a photon to be a wave and a particle. ;-) I don't think so. A photon can be a wave and a particle in the sense that it behaves like a wave and it behaves like a particle. Clearly these are not mutually exclusive attributes. Actually they are. That it is true that a photon is like a wave does not make it false that it is like a particle. Literally speaking, it certainly does. On the other hand, with respect to the claims of religion, for certain claims to be true other claims of other religions do have to be false. So, I don't see the similarity :) I appreciate that. Let me start a description of the similarities with a question: how can a particle go through two different slits? Umm . . . umm . . . ;-) How Many Angels Can Sit On The Point Of A Pin? Maru -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Explanation
At 08:40 PM 11/15/03 +, Alberto Monteiro wrote: Julia Thompson wrote: Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued when their predictions didn't come true :-) But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be plenty of room for the defense to be reasonably successful. :) You *read* horoscopes??? Is there any listowner available so that I can request that you are banned from the list??? I read 'em, too, on occasion. They're on the comics page, after all, and I could always use another good laugh . . . Why Was The Special Personal Toll-Free Number Only For You That Miss Cleo E-Mailed Me The Same Number My Friend Got? Maru -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
At 04:43 PM 11/15/03 -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes and no. I've seen Rumsfeld state that no trials are neededthey can be held indefinately without trial until the war on terror ends. The problems with this, compared to a war like WWII, are obvious I think. The war on terror will not end until there are virtually no more terrorists. So, the Rumsfeld is claiming the right to hold people without trial indefinitely. Dan M. And this is a real issue. There are a lot of people in that camp who have dedicated their lives to killing Americans en masse. I think there's a real possibility that they are going to be held for a very, very long time. I don't see another solution to the problem. _But_ there is no right of habeas corpus for battlefield captures. Period. None at all. If these guys were Americans, they would have Constitutional protections. They don't. People like Erik can wave their hands and make demands - but they aren't doing the dying or the deciding. Their hysteria is fundamentally a product of immaturity - they are like five years olds who want a diamond ring. Adults have to make choices and understand the consequences on both sides of actions. I _don't know_ for sure what to do here. I don't like keeping people indefinitely. I _really_ don't want to release Al Qaeda agents into the world. Military tribunals seem to me the best compromise. But either way they are prisoners captured on a battlefield fighting without state sponsorship - this makes them illegal combatants and they _don't have_ even the rights of POWs, and nothing even approaching the rights of American citizens. Thus, one solution might be for some state (= country, not US state) to claim responsibility for them and their actions. Does anyone think there will be any takers? Particularly since that would mean that state was acknowledging that it had ordered its citizens to attack targets in the US, which would mean that that state would be at war with the US, and do you think any Middle Eastern state could stand up against the US in a regular (.ne. terrorist, .ne. guerrilla) war? -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Ruby Ridge..
At 05:13 PM 11/15/03 -0600, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 4:51 PM Subject: Re: Ruby Ridge.. --- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you saying that the report of the official investigation was false, or are you just interpreting it in a far different manner than I do? http://www.byington.org/Carl/ruby/ruby1.htm As far as I can tell, the orders were consistent with SOP for Houston drug enforcement. Dan M. Just from reading the introduction the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team . . . instituted a shoot on sight policy . . .. That's what I was referring to. Rogers explained his initial thoughts about the Rules of Engagement: In this particular situation, after hearing the description of what had taken place, specifically the fire-fight, the loss of a marshal, it was clear to me that there was a shooting situation taking place at this location. And had the marshal not fired first and killed the dog, who was hardly likely to have been pointing a firearm at him, he would not have gotten shot. Nor would he have shot a teenage boy in the back. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
At 06:47 PM 11/15/03 -0600, Dan Minette wrote: - Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 6:33 PM Subject: Re: christian dreams of murder... --- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Bush administration is doing a pretty good job of this on their own. xponent In The News Maru rob A claim for which you have _no_, as in zero, evidence. A lot of people have _claimed_ that the Administration leaked that name - all of them liberals, oddly enough - but no one has provided even a jot of evidence on that topic. I'm missing something. Didn't Robert Novak claim that he got his info from a high administration official? High on what? ;-) -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: List of Veterans on the List (was Re: Veterans (was Veterans Bushwhacked))
At 10:07 PM 11/15/2003 -0600, you wrote: At 04:41 PM 11/15/03 -0500, Bryon Daly wrote: From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:36 PM 11/15/03 +0900, G. D. Akin wrote: How many veterans on the list? I'll start the count at 1. 2. 3 Not me. (Though my wife, father, step-father, 2 brothers-in-law, and many of our friends and family are). I'm just chiming in to suggest maybe adding what branch of the service you were in, as well. How's this? (Feel free to add names or details as appropriate): 1. G. D. Akin 2. Ronn! Blankenship USAF, O1 - O2, 1976-1979, Systems Engineer (= responsible for miscellaneous stuff no one could put a name to), 6514th Test Squadron (later 6545th Test Group), which was responsible for the testing of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), including all three versions of cruise missiles (air-launched AGM-86/ALCM, sea-launched Tomahawk, and ground-launched GLCM) as well as some early versions of some of the stuff used in Iraq in 1991 and recently. Got out a bit early to go back to school and work on my doctorate after I determined that being in the USAF wasn't going to guarantee me a slot in the astronaut program, either . . . 3. Doug Pensinger Sub sailor, USS Narwhal, SSN 671, Nuke fast attack, based in New London and in the yards in Charlston. E6 Sonar Tech, 1974 to 1980. 4. Damon Agretto -- Ronn! I'm jealous. I signed up for the early enlistment program at the earliest possible moment, 18 months before my ship out date. I got credit for three other classmates enlisting. I think the first meant I'd have extra service time credits and have been a higher pay-grade after boot camp and a straight money bonus for the other part. I was planning for the Navy's nuclear technician school, and I wanted to be on a sub like my Uncle. There was another program that would either un-enlist you and you'd go to school through the ROTC, or you could still be full time Navy but go to college at the same time; I figured I'd apply for it once my first six year commitment was done for. If everything had worked out I'd be three years away from 20 right now, maybe with a college degree, maybe not. Five months before I graduated, seven months before I was to leave, I had an intestinal problem from a childhood accident which required surgery. A week after I graduated the Navy informed me, through my HS guidance councilor, that they didn't want me. It's tough to look back now at what could have been. I'm happy with my life as it turned out so far, but I'll always wonder about the alternate universe where Things Were Different. Kevin T. - VRWC The rising road ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Six Sigma
At 11:00 PM 11/15/03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 08:59 PM 11/14/03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 11/13/2003 11:55:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 10:54 PM 11/13/03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone help me with a book or list of books to help me get a basic understanding of Six Sigma principles/implementation. Agh - I am surrounded by sick sigmas. My hospital has a major deal with GE to buy almost everything that uses electricity from them. Part of the deal is that they teach us management skills so I am Six Sigmad CAP (Change acceleration projected_ and Worked Out. Ronn wrote- FWIW, the quote about 3.4 errors/million came from the GE intro page which popped up in a Google search. Admittedly, I was wondering why you were looking for the info, given what I know of your profession. I wondered if perhaps someone had come up with a six-sigma program for the medical profession, e,g., a goal that there would be no more than 3.4 negative outcomes per million hospital admissions, or something . . . I am going to be doing some work for a company that uses Six Sigma, and need to have a basic understanding of the principles/process. Lately, I am not always in a place to be on the computer and have several hours where a book fills the time nicely. So much for my suggestion. From what I have read so far the Six Sigma approach can be applied to manufacturing, admin or service sectors. If you recall your basic statistics class, it is based on the idea that all errors less than six standard deviations (six sigma) from the mean can be eliminated. Healthcare is considered service sector and reality is that it is a business. Quality is harder to measure in hospitals, etc- for instance it is difficult to determine productivity all the time with people who are not predictable, or varying perceptions of quality or patient care widgets are quite a bit more predictable. I don't usually work in conventional hospital settings, and spend more time than the average PT in industry. I had a chance to spend time doing some teaching this spring at a hospital in Maryville, MO, where they did something neat. They are the first health care group to receive the Baldrige Quality Award (not that I knew what that was until they told me- it is usually given to manufacturing, etc). This is a small hospital, but they were incredible- housekeepers making sure patients were comfortable, ER with less than 15-30 min wait, and they were starting on demand meals (think room service). The staff didn't grumble or think this was out of the ordinary- talk about a quality culture. Maybe 3.4 is not such an off the wall thing (grin). My smart-aleck response was of course referring to negative outcome as it is used as a euphemism in the medical profession: i.e., only 3.4 patients out of a million die or are not cured . . . As Of This Month I've Been Waiting 22 Years For A Cure Or At Least An Effective Treatment Maru -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: christian dreams of murder...
Gautam Mukunda wrote: Here's a question for you, if you think the Declaration should guide our actions. You supported Judge Roy Moore, right? Endowed _by their Creator_ with certain inalienable rights... Not so good for separation of church and state, is it? Sufficiently ambiguous. Evolution is my creator. snip If we let these people go, they will go back to killing Americans. If we try them in a fully-fledged public trial, we will destroy our ability to protect ourselves from their compatriots and distort our own justice system. If you choose the second, _then be aware that you are choosing the second_. I would respect that. I wouldn't agree, but I would respect it. When you make a choice, you choose all the consequences of that choice (Lois Bujold, I believe). So the consequence in this case will be simple. Some, perhaps many, innocents will die. That is a virtual certainty. _Are you willing to accept that?_ Maybe you are. That's an absolutist position that has no grounding in law or precedent - and I would say an honest person would admit that as well. But it's an understandable one. I'm not even sure that a fully fledged public trial will destroy our capability to protect ourselves. I've heard this claim over and over again. If Iraq is any indication, our intelligence sucks anyway at least when it comes to the middle east. Can you substantiate the idea that trials would destroy our ability to protect ourselves. Another point worth considering is that injustice causes more people to seek justice. We may be keeping a few hundred people from attacking us by imprisoning them, but how many - their friends, relatives countrymen - are inspired by their captivity, and how many would be ideologically discouraged if we released those we can not easily prove are guilty? I think that it's highly likely that we have created a greater threat by holding these people than we would have if we let them go. This isn't going away. Children close their eyes on the world. Adults have to live with their eyes open. Adults have to realize that the world isn't black and white. One might justify corporal punishment by saying it discourages misbehavior, but of course the answer is far more complicated than that. Many of us that have raised children or trained animals have come to the realization that negative reinforcement doesn't work very well and in some cases it works very poorly indeed. What doesn't work well with individuals in all probability, works even less well with larger groups. I believe that our actions in Guantanamo and in Iraq are breeding much greater problems than those they are designed to solve. We are breeding hate in every corner of the globe and it _will_ come back to haunt us. So make your choice. Choose to let them go, and choose all the deaths springing from it. Choose to try them, and choose the deaths and defeats coming from that. Choose to hold them until a better solution presents itself (and note that we have already released some of the people there). Or heck, suggest a different choice - I'd love to hear it. But for God's sake admit what the choices are. My choice would have been to treat them humanely and as prisoners of war except for those who could be tried for atrocities or other war crimes. You say the consequences would be dire, I say the consequences of suspending our principals has a much higher price. -- Doug ROU Let Freedom Ring ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: List of Veterans on the List (was Re: Veterans (was Veterans Bushwhacked))
Kevin Tarr wrote: I'm jealous. I signed up for the early enlistment program at the earliest possible moment, 18 months before my ship out date. I got credit for three other classmates enlisting. I think the first meant I'd have extra service time credits and have been a higher pay-grade after boot camp and a straight money bonus for the other part. I was planning for the Navy's nuclear technician school, and I wanted to be on a sub like my Uncle. There was another program that would either un-enlist you and you'd go to school through the ROTC, or you could still be full time Navy but go to college at the same time; I figured I'd apply for it once my first six year commitment was done for. If everything had worked out I'd be three years away from 20 right now, maybe with a college degree, maybe not. Five months before I graduated, seven months before I was to leave, I had an intestinal problem from a childhood accident which required surgery. A week after I graduated the Navy informed me, through my HS guidance councilor, that they didn't want me. It's tough to look back now at what could have been. I'm happy with my life as it turned out so far, but I'll always wonder about the alternate universe where Things Were Different. Bad luck! 8^(. Do you know what boat your Uncle was on? I count the military as an excellent experience though I was ready to get back to the real world when my time was up. -- Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
won't get polled again
Thursday night got two phone calls, opinion polls. The first was general about TV viewing, how many night a week did I watch TV between 8-10, what channels did I mostly like, what types of shows. The second was a long one about politics. I cannot say what organization it was from. Some of the questions may have been leading, but I'm looking at it through a strict filter. Asked about my feelings of political organizations, from the top two down through NRA and ACLU. They asked about four of the nine dwarfs, Dean, Clark, Gephart, and Edwards. They asked if I would vote for a hypothetical democratic candidate, Mr. Bill Ford, if he made certain statements, then if I'd vote for Dean after the caller stated some of his statements. Also he read paragraphs and asked what point meant the most to me. (taxes) That's four TV polls I've done now, and one radio; and my second political poll. The only thing I have to add is these people need to speak up. The political pollster had a sub-continent accent. I could understand him fine, but had to ask him to repeat his questions a few times because he spoke quietly. I have a great phone voice, I wonder if they are hiring. Kevin T. - VRWC I'm important! sarcasm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: [Listref] Cocoa antioxidants
At 07:49 PM 11/14/03 -0800, Deborah Harrell wrote: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Deborah Harrell wrote: Debbi who found that, when camping, instant hot cocoa is pretty good with a dollop of peppermint schnapps... :} Don't tempt me. :) Julia off alcohol for awhile Well, you can always take some fresh mint leaves and pulp them in a mortar (of the and pestle kind, Shopping list: Mint leaves, fresh. New mortar and pestle that hasn't been used for years of chemistry experiments. *not* ordnance! ... or brick cement, or an academic hat ... ), and add _that_ to your cocoa. With a dash of cream, it'd be sort of a 'liquid York Peppermint Patty.' :) But what would Charlie Brown say? The Ski Lodges Are Opening Up Maru Funny, the people down here are putting their ski boats away . . . -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: List of Veterans on the List (was Re: Veterans (was Veterans Bushwhacked))
So its details youse wants? ;) 12K (tank Loader/Driver/Gunner), USANG, 28th ID(Mech). Damon. = Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
