Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hakan: "To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not?" "Unmarried cohabitation. Eight states continue to make it a crime for an unmarried man and a woman to cohabit together: Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia fall into this category." http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htmHakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike,I did not know of the sedition act of 1918:"...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of governmentof the United States, or the Constitution of the United States..."This make any talk about "freedom of speech" a joke.The unravelling of the lack of democracy, has never been so obvious as the execution and results from the two last elections and the way the Iraqi war has been pursued. I still think that "Corprocracy" is a better word for the governing method of US.It seems that we have to change the phrase "the nation of the free" to "the nation of the blind".To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Is it enough if only one of them is married? This info I keep as one of the most bizarre I have. LOLHakan___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Uh oh. I'm cohabitating illegally. Wait'll I tell my GF. -Mike Michael Redler wrote: ** Hakan: To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Unmarried cohabitation. Eight states continue to make it a crime for an unmarried man and a woman to cohabit together: Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia fall into this category. http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htm */Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote: Mike, I did not know of the sedition act of 1918: ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... This make any talk about freedom of speech a joke. The unravelling of the lack of democracy, has never been so obvious as the execution and results from the two last elections and the way the Iraqi war has been pursued. I still think that Corprocracy is a better word for the governing method of US. It seems that we have to change the phrase the nation of the free to the nation of the blind. To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Is it enough if only one of them is married? This info I keep as one of the most bizarre I have. LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Mike, Never heard about it before. LOL This is fantastic, a long time since I had such a good laugh. Not since Bush said that they did the best to kill their own military. LOL In a range of ...so do we statements, he actually said. They try their best to kill our people, so do we. LOL Is it enough that one of them are married? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Amazing!! How can they call it the land of the free, when it is against the law to be free? Hakan At 14:28 29/08/2005, you wrote: Hakan: To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Unmarried cohabitation. Eight states continue to make it a crime for an unmarried man and a woman to cohabit together: Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia fall into this category. http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htmhttp://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htm Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike, I did not know of the sedition act of 1918: ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... This make any talk about freedom of speech a joke. The unravelling of the lack of democracy, has never been so obvious as the execution and results from the two last elections and the way the Iraqi war has been pursued. I still think that Corprocracy is a better word for the governing method of US. It seems that we have to change the phrase the nation of the free to the nation of the blind. To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Is it enough if onl! y one of them is married? This info I keep as one of the most bizarre I have. LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Mike, Watch it, she might take it as a proposal, or worse, move out. Hakan At 15:48 29/08/2005, you wrote: Uh oh. I'm cohabitating illegally. Wait'll I tell my GF. -Mike Michael Redler wrote: ** Hakan: To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Unmarried cohabitation. Eight states continue to make it a crime for an unmarried man and a woman to cohabit together: Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia fall into this category. http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htm */Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote: Mike, I did not know of the sedition act of 1918: ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... This make any talk about freedom of speech a joke. The unravelling of the lack of democracy, has never been so obvious as the execution and results from the two last elections and the way the Iraqi war has been pursued. I still think that Corprocracy is a better word for the governing method of US. It seems that we have to change the phrase the nation of the free to the nation of the blind. To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Is it enough if only one of them is married? This info I keep as one of the most bizarre I have. LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hakan, If only one of the cohabitants were married, I think that would satisfy the letter of the law. But with the high moral values of the majority of citizens (especially the followers of TV evangelists like Pat Robertson), these two might get linched for living in sin! As far as being the land of the free, Goethe said it best - None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. We are only as free as the governments let us be... BTW, thank goodness I am married (to my cohabitant). I wouldn't want to give the police, or the linch mob, any reason to come take me (or my wife) away. Thanks for the brief respite from bioenergy and serious politics. Earl Kinsley [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 10:11 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers Mike, Never heard about it before. LOL This is fantastic, a long time since I had such a good laugh. Not since Bush said that they did the best to kill their own military. LOL In a range of ...so do we statements, he actually said. They try their best to kill our people, so do we. LOL Is it enough that one of them are married? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Amazing!! How can they call it the land of the free, when it is against the law to be free? Hakan At 14:28 29/08/2005, you wrote: Hakan: To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Unmarried cohabitation. Eight states continue to make it a crime for an unmarried man and a woman to cohabit together: Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia fall into this category. http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htmhttp://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htm Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike, I did not know of the sedition act of 1918: ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... This make any talk about freedom of speech a joke. The unravelling of the lack of democracy, has never been so obvious as the execution and results from the two last elections and the way the Iraqi war has been pursued. I still think that Corprocracy is a better word for the governing method of US. It seems that we have to change the phrase the nation of the free to the nation of the blind. To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Is it enough if onl! y one of them is married? This info I keep as one of the most bizarre I have. LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
That can't be true!!?? Is it, really??? Heavens... LOL Have to save that URL... http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htm Unmarried cohabitation. Eight states continue to make it a crime for an unmarried man and a woman to cohabit together: Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia fall into this category. -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Hakan Falk Sent: den 29 augusti 2005 16:12 To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers Mike, Never heard about it before. LOL This is fantastic, a long time since I had such a good laugh. Not since Bush said that they did the best to kill their own military. LOL In a range of ...so do we statements, he actually said. They try their best to kill our people, so do we. LOL Is it enough that one of them are married? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Amazing!! How can they call it the land of the free, when it is against the law to be free? Hakan At 14:28 29/08/2005, you wrote: Hakan: To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Unmarried cohabitation. Eight states continue to make it a crime for an unmarried man and a woman to cohabit together: Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia fall into this category. http://www.unmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htmhttp://www.u nmarriedamerica.org/Court/privacy-ruling.htm Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mike, I did not know of the sedition act of 1918: ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... This make any talk about freedom of speech a joke. The unravelling of the lack of democracy, has never been so obvious as the execution and results from the two last elections and the way the Iraqi war has been pursued. I still think that Corprocracy is a better word for the governing method of US. It seems that we have to change the phrase the nation of the free to the nation of the blind. To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Is it enough if onl! y one of them is married? This info I keep as one of the most bizarre I have. LOL Hakan ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.o rg Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Cliff, we are all here to discuss learn. Do not be afraid to state a view that is not widely held. It is only by airing these views that we can either be convinced by you, or you by us to lead a better, more peaceful existence. regards Doug (an Aussie...) On Sunday 28 August 2005 2:17, Clif Caldwell wrote: Hello Keith, As I am fairly new to this list I should have done some achive research before posting. My bad . You obviously have spent quite some time arguing your opinion on these political issues. I have not. I spoke from my convictions not from my expertise. As far as /trolling/ I must admit I am unfamiliar with this term. I assume it has to do with a certain type of behavior on mailing lists or in chat rooms. Since I have very little experience in either arena I will do my best not to do this in the future. I may not be the brightest bulb in the box but I do learn. From now on I will allow these political issues and religious issues to be discussed here without my input. With my somewhat limited verbal sparring skills and my deep seated convictions I would simply get in the way of /meaningful /discussions. Is this penitent enough for you ? The unanimously vehement reaction to my comments speaks volumes. Thanks for the education. It is all your's. I don't mind a good fight but why bother . I will limit my discussions to areas I know even less about, namely building my first biodiesel processor. Have at it. Signing off from this thread and any other remotely related threads. With warm (occassionally very warm) regards, Clif Keith Addison wrote: Hello Clif Keith Addison wrote: My my. And I was just thinking you might be a man who'd do a bit of checking before he shot his foot off. Again. I do rather wonder what you mean when you say right here in America when actually where you are right now is right here on the global Internet, on a global discussion group with a global membership that includes many Muslims living in Muslim countries, who are probably more aware than you are of calls from your country - calls and deeds done - to kill them and their leaders. But that doesn't count, does it? It does here. If you want outrage over the coverage of the war in Iraq you'll find it aplenty, but you won't like it - it's outrage at the unquestioning, knee-jerk coverage your so-called liberal press (ROFL!!!) gave to the pack of blatant lies that led unfailingly to everything and everybody getting torn to pieces in Iraq (as most of us predicted at the time), including your precious military, and every single promise broken. Guilty as accused concerning not backing up my statements. I have remedied this in another post. Well, you haven't given Fred any work, each and every one of your refs has been debunked many times before and it's all in the archives. In Iraq, we're not fighting for ourselves, said Bean, from his home base in Fort Campbell, Ky. We're over there fighting so the Iraqis can have their own Fourth of July. LOL! Yeah, it's not funny, but black humour's a survival trait these days. And guilty as accused as writing from a decidingly US perspective. I have traveled extensively including performing tsunami relief (as a civilian paying my own way) in Banda Aceh, Indonesia (90+ % Isalmic). Please understand that I have cried with, struggled with and even prayed with Muslims and Christians all over the world. (I have carried out humanitarian efforts in Central and South America and Jordan also.) Unfortunately I was not as sensitive as I should have been to all the readers of this list. I am a former officer in the USAF So you keep saying. so perhaps I do have a fondness for the fine, exceedingly capable and patriotic men and women serving to protect and defend a country Americans are inclined to be VERY careful about seeming to criticise that, most will pay it due obeisance. But most people here are not Americans and can be expected to treat it as the false sacred cow that it is. Again, please see the archives, we've had Purple Heart-winning US vets arguing with each here before this. So you might as well stop saying it, it doesn't secure you any high ground. I personally feel is a pretty good place to live. Perhaps I am living under some delusions and if that is the case then I'm sure someone will try to correct the errors of my ways. Thanks for the input. I will give it some thought. Just a guy sorting things out, I wonder. I think you're trolling. You slip in and lay some flame-bait, it duly raises noise and distraction, then you're all penitent about it, and then you do it again, twice so far. I'm not convinced by your penitence this time, and there won't be a third time. Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Clif Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Mike, I did not know of the sedition act of 1918: ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... This make any talk about freedom of speech a joke. The unravelling of the lack of democracy, has never been so obvious as the execution and results from the two last elections and the way the Iraqi war has been pursued. I still think that Corprocracy is a better word for the governing method of US. It seems that we have to change the phrase the nation of the free to the nation of the blind. To condition the cohabitation of a men and a women on if they are married or not? Do they have to be married to each other, or just married? Is it enough if only one of them is married? This info I keep as one of the most bizarre I have. LOL Hakan At 17:26 27/08/2005, you wrote: Well done Keith. So here we are again, stating the obvious, setting the record straight about a war which violates international laws (which the US helped write, then signed onto) related to justification for war, engagement, torture, detainment and the fabrication of the term enemy combatant which has effectively stripped people of the most basic human rights and left the accuser to decide guilt and length of detainment. It's frightening how the rhetoric says that the US is the land of the free and that it is a model for democracy which should be imposed on other countries considering the fact that there are 4000 federal laws on the books and some of them, along with many state laws dictate what is permissible (or not) in your personal life. For example, in at least two states, it's ILLEGAL for a male and female to cohabitate unless they are married. In my opinion, you can measure how close a country is to being a police state by the number of laws it has. I say all this without even getting started on the constitutional violations contained in the USA Patriot act (as many of us are already aware and have already discussed). Then there is my personal favorite, the sedition act of 1918: ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... When asked about people in US history who I admire most, I will enthusiastically talk about those who have defended and sometimes died defending freedom within it's borders. Coincidentally, few of those people are politicians. Mike Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My my. And I was just thinking you might be a man who'd do a bit of checking before he shot his foot off. Again. I do rather wonder what you mean when you say right here in America when actually where you are right now is right here on the global Internet, on a global discussion group with a global membership that includes many Muslims living in Muslim countries, who are probably more aware than you are of calls from your country - calls and deeds done - to kill them and their leaders. But that doesn't count, does it? It does here. If you want outrage over the coverage of the war in Iraq you'll find it aplenty, but you won't like it - it's outrage at the unquestioning, knee-jerk coverage your so-called liberal press (ROFL!!!) gave to the pack of blatant lies that led unfailingly to everything and everybody getting torn to pi! eces in Iraq (as most of us predicted at the time), including your precious military, and every single promise broken. Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : What ex! actly do you mean by that? Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. It is not far away from renewable energy sources. I think you should read this carefully, since it looks as if you haven't
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hello Clif Hello Keith, As I am fairly new to this list I should have done some achive research before posting. My bad . You obviously have spent quite some time arguing your opinion on these political issues. I have not. I spoke from my convictions not from my expertise. Sorry Clif, it's a slimy tactic to say you only lost an argument because your opponent is better at arguing. The reason you lost is that you were indeed arguing from your convictions, and, as many people said, those convictions do not stand up to the test of reality. Neither did your arguments, and that's because they're specious, NOT because you were out-argued. There are folks out there, and I know some of them, who limit their input to sources which reflect only their particular mindset and they reject information from other sources as false or biased whether or not that is indeed true. They want the world to be a mirror image of their cherished beliefs whether or not the beliefs are true, good or wise. That makes no sense. - Gustl, yesterday. One of the fundamental findings of cognitive science is that people think in terms of frames and metaphors - conceptual structures. The frames are in the synapses of our brains - physically present in the form of neural circuitry. When the facts don't fit the frames, the frames are kept and the facts ignored. -- George Lakoff You encounter facts, you argue, you lose, but you deny the facts anyway and defend your cherished notions. That doesn't stop you calling other people liars though, and failing to prove it. You'll keep right on doing it if we let you, but we won't let you. We've seen it all before here, many times, and we don't welcome it. You have to be honest. As far as /trolling/ I must admit I am unfamiliar with this term. I assume it has to do with a certain type of behavior on mailing lists or in chat rooms. Since I have very little experience in either arena I will do my best not to do this in the future. I don't believe you. You don't need a degree in it to be a troll, you know quite well what that certain type of behavior entails. I may not be the brightest bulb in the box but I do learn. We see no evidence of that, what we see is denial. We see denial too in your selective responses to the replies you receive. You can't ignore people here anymore than you can ignore the facts. From now on I will allow these political issues and religious issues to be discussed here without my input. That's nice of you! LOL! Will you allow us to discuss biofuels issues too? Like this for instance? Some of these issues may seem tangential at first. Close examination, however, will reveal how energy use, foreign policy, religious perspective, racism and many other isms blend to create the overall milieu in which the topic of biofuels exist. We who have been here for any length of time agree by consensus that which is deserving of discussion and that which is not. It's remarkably self regulating, for the most part. - Robert I believe I have said this before but I believe that the information we garner and through which we sift is biofuel for the mind. Politics may be and often is heavily discussed but through this we gain an understanding of others who may be vastly different from ourselves and we come to learn that although there are many differences we have a common thread running through this which is that we wish good for ourselves and no harm to others. What gets in the way of this is partisanship whether it is religious, political, economic, racial or whatever else. Through these discussions we get closer to the truth of things and become closer to being an organic whole. - Gustl With my somewhat limited verbal sparring skills and my deep seated convictions I would simply get in the way of /meaningful /discussions. Is this penitent enough for you ? Drop the BS Clif, it doesn't work. The unanimously vehement reaction to my comments speaks volumes. Thanks for the education. It is all your's. I don't mind a good fight but why bother . So Clif retires from the field unscathed, both honour and cherished notions intact. You believe it if you like Clif, the other folks here know different. I will limit my discussions to areas I know even less about, namely building my first biodiesel processor. WE will limit your discussions Clif, if necessary. Let me refer you once again to this: List rules: http://sustainablelists.org/pipermail/biofuel_sustainablelists.org/200 5-May/07.html Or: http://snipurl.com/gi45 Step out of line again and you're gone. Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Have at it. Signing off from this thread and any other remotely related threads. With warm (occassionally very warm) regards, Clif Keith Addison wrote: Hello Clif Keith Addison wrote: My my. And I was just thinking you might be a man who'd
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
To keep the exercise honest, as inevitably will all attorney's involved [chuckle, chuckle, snot, smurf.:-], Robertson's words, mindset and progressive thoughts need to be disected precisely as spoken. Unfortunately for him, he all too quickly took the excercise from the realm of ruminating to advocacy with: We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with. His intial qualifier to that statement of: You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, doesn't suffice as a component of a rumination defense, in light of his transitional words to advocacy with: We have the ability to take him out, followed by: and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. Mr. Robertson negotiated what initially was a very dangerous exercise in reason and came out of the curve full throttle, rationalizing and advocating, in front of initially millions, and now billions, of persons. The author Dean is perfectly right in his final conclusion. But he unfortunately doesn't deftly identify where Robertson's switching of tracks and self-incrimination occurred. .. On a personal note? As if anyone cares... :-)? Differing ideologies don't need to initiate fatwahs, when houses such as Robertson's and Bush's are egocentrically disposed to implosion. Fanatacism, albeit under any guise or becalmed expression, remains fanatacism, no matter the flag. Todd Swearingen Doug Foskey wrote: Thanks: I find that illuminating to say the least. I personally hope that the US does take this further, otherwise how can they insist foreign powers prosecute their citizens for similar acts (including for instance statements by Mullahs) regards Doug On Sunday 28 August 2005 8:26, S. Chapin wrote: Dear List, A bit about the legal ramifications, though there will be none, of Pat Robertson's statements concerning Chavez. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20050826.html by John Dean . Cheers, S. Chapin ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
As quoted here, what I find interesting about the sedition act is the very specific phrasing: ..utter...abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... In its first few lines the 1918 act forbids lying about the government and the armed forces, interfering with bond sales and recruiting, suborning the military, and implicitly excludes speaking up about criminal politicians, graft, corruption, election fraud, evil law, etc..., and expressly includes only bad-mouthing our representative democracy and our constitution. Compared to the patriot acts this starts out as a jewel of moderation and clarity. When you read the entire act, a very different picture emerges http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918 It was repealed in 1921, leaving the USA with most of the constitutional protections of free speech and privacy for more than eighty years, until the patriot acts tossed the Bill of Rights into the trash. I'm sure this has been talked to death here already, but I want to point out the incredibly twisted logic that has gripped our government for the last four years: Premise: The terrorists bomb us because they want to destroy our freedoms and democratic way of life Conclusion: Let's win against terrorism by passing laws destroying our freedoms Let's protect democracy by handing our government over to multinational corporations. To protect our democracy, we must retain power at any cost, including the derailing of election safeguards and consistently lying about every aspect of our policies and intentions. We'll make the world safe from terrorism by invading sovereign nations and murdering and crippling huge numbers of Afghanis, Iraqis, and coalition soldiers. If the premise were true, then we've handed the victory to the terrorists in the conclusions. Of course the premise is absurd, half the world (9/10ths?) hates us because we've consistently used our power to advance an agenda of profit first, capitalism first, justice last. Taryn On Aug 28, 2005, at 6:03 AM, Hakan Falk wrote to mike who wrote to keith. Mike, I did not know of the sedition act of 1918: ... Hakan At 17:26 27/08/2005, you wrote: Well done Keith. ... ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States... When asked about people in US history who I admire most, I will enthusiastically talk about those who have defended and sometimes died defending freedom within it's borders. Coincidentally, few of those people are politicians. Mike Keith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My my. And I was just thinking you might be a man who'd do a bit of ... ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hi Todd Dogonnit Keith, Sorry about that. If the guy is going to behave in such a fashion, those who have to suffer it should at least be able to grill him about his generalities and stereotyping until he's forced to admit that there is a lot more to the bag of beans than he would care to recognize. He won't admit it if he doesn't want to, no matter what you do, you've seen it yourself. Anyway, he's been here for two and a half years already, if he doesn't care to recognise it by now, then again he doesn't want to. (I guess that's his prerogative, but it's not his prerogative to dump it on us, nor on anybody.) Grilling him's unlikely to get anywhere, countering his views would show him up to everyone else but he still wouldn't see it. I think there's no shortage of such demonstrations in the list archives and I doubt doing it again this time would have added anything. Just throttling the guy lets him off too easy. Now it's he who gets to claim that his sensibilities were offended, further enforcing and propigating his peculiar beliefs elsewhere. Give 'em enough rope to hang themselves. If they're smart, they won't use it all. Wouldn't it be true that if they were smart they wouldn't do it in the first place? He already hanged himself, he ignored everything and everyone, that's not smart. If they aren't, the world should at least be given the pleasure of watching them swing at the end of the yardarm of their own making. :-) Do you mean in the sense that justice must be seen to be done or something like that? You might have a point. But really it just wastes time, it's a distraction, it clutters the place up, makes it more difficult for serious people to carry on a reasonable discussion. It's exactly that kind of crap that's truly off-topic. It doesn't take much to drag a list down, as we all know, just one or two heedless people who want it all their own way. It's because this kept happening time and time again that people started yelling NO TOPIC-COPS! in the first place, years ago. We had it all out then, a few times, and that's when the rule was made. We formalised it a year ago, me and a group of list members, the whole list concurred, and that's that. Now it happens much less. Has anything much changed, is there anything more to it now than the following? What does it amount to anyway? You're only allowed to talk about what **I** want to talk about? Usually it's either that or a poorly disguised demand for censorship. Or a complaint that there isn't any censorship, which looks like Duff's case. Not that he'd call it censorship. There's been a constant trickle of these people for nearly five years, and what most of them have in common is that no matter what you do, no matter what's proved or disproved and resides in a publicly accessible archives for all to see, if he wants to claim that it's his sensibilities that were offended and wants to propagate his beliefs elsewhere, HE'LL DO IT ANYWAY. Another thing we've found is that it doesn't matter. If people are smart they'll check, ask a few questions, and quickly discover that he's full of it. If not, then the same applies - what does it matter? Todd, I'm not just dismissing what you say, you make some good points, as ever. I'll surely keep them in mind. Too late this time though. I should say I don't know what Duff will do or won't do, I'm not trying to hang all this on him personally, all I can say is how other people who've expressed the same views have behaved in the past. Anyway it's not my concern. My often-stated position is that as list-owner my first obligation is to the list itself and the issues it represents, my second obligation is to the individual members, UNTIL they put the first obligation at risk. We do everything we can to make sure list members know what kind of community they've joined and how to get the best out of it, if they don't take any notice that's their problem. It's their loss too - it wouldn't be easy to persuade me that heedless and selfish people are any loss to the list. It isn't here for outreach, it doesn't have a missionary role, it's only here to be useful to its members (many of whom use it as a source for their own outreach). Hey, Todd, all this isn't aimed at you either, just restating policy. Best wishes Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Todd Swearingen Keith Addison wrote: Greetings to all, I am an avid alternative fuel advocate who is building a large home sized processor. I do hope you will read this and maybe it will help get us back on track!!All this talk of politics as far as I am concerned is for the most part way out of line,and with a lot of misconceptions toward a political adjenda.We All need to get focused on what and where we are headed with the alternative energy issues,and stop talking about all these politics, and put our time and money where
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
And I was so looking forward to see how he would set his own noose in motion by his own processes. Oh well. Keith Addison wrote: Hi Todd Dogonnit Keith, Sorry about that. If the guy is going to behave in such a fashion, those who have to suffer it should at least be able to grill him about his generalities and stereotyping until he's forced to admit that there is a lot more to the bag of beans than he would care to recognize. He won't admit it if he doesn't want to, no matter what you do, you've seen it yourself. Anyway, he's been here for two and a half years already, if he doesn't care to recognise it by now, then again he doesn't want to. (I guess that's his prerogative, but it's not his prerogative to dump it on us, nor on anybody.) Grilling him's unlikely to get anywhere, countering his views would show him up to everyone else but he still wouldn't see it. I think there's no shortage of such demonstrations in the list archives and I doubt doing it again this time would have added anything. Just throttling the guy lets him off too easy. Now it's he who gets to claim that his sensibilities were offended, further enforcing and propigating his peculiar beliefs elsewhere. Give 'em enough rope to hang themselves. If they're smart, they won't use it all. Wouldn't it be true that if they were smart they wouldn't do it in the first place? He already hanged himself, he ignored everything and everyone, that's not smart. If they aren't, the world should at least be given the pleasure of watching them swing at the end of the yardarm of their own making. :-) Do you mean in the sense that justice must be seen to be done or something like that? You might have a point. But really it just wastes time, it's a distraction, it clutters the place up, makes it more difficult for serious people to carry on a reasonable discussion. It's exactly that kind of crap that's truly off-topic. It doesn't take much to drag a list down, as we all know, just one or two heedless people who want it all their own way. It's because this kept happening time and time again that people started yelling NO TOPIC-COPS! in the first place, years ago. We had it all out then, a few times, and that's when the rule was made. We formalised it a year ago, me and a group of list members, the whole list concurred, and that's that. Now it happens much less. Has anything much changed, is there anything more to it now than the following? What does it amount to anyway? You're only allowed to talk about what **I** want to talk about? Usually it's either that or a poorly disguised demand for censorship. Or a complaint that there isn't any censorship, which looks like Duff's case. Not that he'd call it censorship. There's been a constant trickle of these people for nearly five years, and what most of them have in common is that no matter what you do, no matter what's proved or disproved and resides in a publicly accessible archives for all to see, if he wants to claim that it's his sensibilities that were offended and wants to propagate his beliefs elsewhere, HE'LL DO IT ANYWAY. Another thing we've found is that it doesn't matter. If people are smart they'll check, ask a few questions, and quickly discover that he's full of it. If not, then the same applies - what does it matter? Todd, I'm not just dismissing what you say, you make some good points, as ever. I'll surely keep them in mind. Too late this time though. I should say I don't know what Duff will do or won't do, I'm not trying to hang all this on him personally, all I can say is how other people who've expressed the same views have behaved in the past. Anyway it's not my concern. My often-stated position is that as list-owner my first obligation is to the list itself and the issues it represents, my second obligation is to the individual members, UNTIL they put the first obligation at risk. We do everything we can to make sure list members know what kind of community they've joined and how to get the best out of it, if they don't take any notice that's their problem. It's their loss too - it wouldn't be easy to persuade me that heedless and selfish people are any loss to the list. It isn't here for outreach, it doesn't have a missionary role, it's only here to be useful to its members (many of whom use it as a source for their own outreach). Hey, Todd, all this isn't aimed at you either, just restating policy. Best wishes Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Todd Swearingen Keith Addison wrote: Greetings to all, I am an avid alternative fuel advocate who is building a large home sized processor. I do hope you will read this and maybe it will help get us back on track!!All this talk of politics as far as I am concerned is for the most part way out of line,and with a lot of misconceptions toward a political
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
wait...are talking about Streeter or the Bush administration? I want my SUV sung to the tune of I want my MTV... Appal Energy wrote: And I was so looking forward to see how he would set his own noose in motion by his own processes. Oh well. Keith Addison wrote: Hi Todd Dogonnit Keith, Sorry about that. If the guy is going to behave in such a fashion, those who have to suffer it should at least be able to grill him about his generalities and stereotyping until he's forced to admit that there is a lot more to the bag of beans than he would care to recognize. He won't admit it if he doesn't want to, no matter what you do, you've seen it yourself. Anyway, he's been here for two and a half years already, if he doesn't care to recognise it by now, then again he doesn't want to. (I guess that's his prerogative, but it's not his prerogative to dump it on us, nor on anybody.) Grilling him's unlikely to get anywhere, countering his views would show him up to everyone else but he still wouldn't see it. I think there's no shortage of such demonstrations in the list archives and I doubt doing it again this time would have added anything. Just throttling the guy lets him off too easy. Now it's he who gets to claim that his sensibilities were offended, further enforcing and propigating his peculiar beliefs elsewhere. Give 'em enough rope to hang themselves. If they're smart, they won't use it all. Wouldn't it be true that if they were smart they wouldn't do it in the first place? He already hanged himself, he ignored everything and everyone, that's not smart. If they aren't, the world should at least be given the pleasure of watching them swing at the end of the yardarm of their own making. :-) Do you mean in the sense that justice must be seen to be done or something like that? You might have a point. But really it just wastes time, it's a distraction, it clutters the place up, makes it more difficult for serious people to carry on a reasonable discussion. It's exactly that kind of crap that's truly off-topic. It doesn't take much to drag a list down, as we all know, just one or two heedless people who want it all their own way. It's because this kept happening time and time again that people started yelling NO TOPIC-COPS! in the first place, years ago. We had it all out then, a few times, and that's when the rule was made. We formalised it a year ago, me and a group of list members, the whole list concurred, and that's that. Now it happens much less. Has anything much changed, is there anything more to it now than the following? What does it amount to anyway? You're only allowed to talk about what **I** want to talk about? Usually it's either that or a poorly disguised demand for censorship. Or a complaint that there isn't any censorship, which looks like Duff's case. Not that he'd call it censorship. There's been a constant trickle of these people for nearly five years, and what most of them have in common is that no matter what you do, no matter what's proved or disproved and resides in a publicly accessible archives for all to see, if he wants to claim that it's his sensibilities that were offended and wants to propagate his beliefs elsewhere, HE'LL DO IT ANYWAY. Another thing we've found is that it doesn't matter. If people are smart they'll check, ask a few questions, and quickly discover that he's full of it. If not, then the same applies - what does it matter? Todd, I'm not just dismissing what you say, you make some good points, as ever. I'll surely keep them in mind. Too late this time though. I should say I don't know what Duff will do or won't do, I'm not trying to hang all this on him personally, all I can say is how other people who've expressed the same views have behaved in the past. Anyway it's not my concern. My often-stated position is that as list-owner my first obligation is to the list itself and the issues it represents, my second obligation is to the individual members, UNTIL they put the first obligation at risk. We do everything we can to make sure list members know what kind of community they've joined and how to get the best out of it, if they don't take any notice that's their problem. It's their loss too - it wouldn't be easy to persuade me that heedless and selfish people are any loss to the list. It isn't here for outreach, it doesn't have a missionary role, it's only here to be useful to its members (many of whom use it as a source for their own outreach). Hey, Todd, all this isn't aimed at you either, just restating policy. Best wishes Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Todd Swearingen Keith Addison wrote: Greetings to all, I am an avid alternative fuel advocate who is building a large home sized processor. I do
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Keith Addison wrote: Hello David Hi Keith:) I expect that's covered under free speech. I'd personally rate Robertsons comments as up there with any number of people who advocate the death of Bush for crimes against humanity or somesuch. If Bush were assasinated would these people really be responsible? Maybe I didn't notice but I have not heard of anyone calling for the death of Bush. Excepting some of the victims of course, but not anybody in the US, which I think is what you're talking about. Surely you could imagine such a thing? Perhaps around a coffee table? Offering your opinion that X should be assasinated either is or is not a crime; whether it's done on national TV or around the neighborhood watering hole is really irrelevent. What if Chavez is murdered is murdered and CIA is behind it, will he not be pursued for suggesting it? I don't believe so. The idea that the CIA would do something because this nut thought it was a good idea is laughable. Take a step back and listen to yourself. Does anyone on this list thing anyone at the CIA is going to wake up and say HEY! Robertson thinks we should assasinate a foreign head of state! Guess we'd better start laying plans C'mon, that's just silly. I'd be surprised if there weren't at least elements within the CIA who're thinking the same way as Robertson. I think the administration thinks the same way as Robertson. A lot of people think that. I think Chavez thinks that too. Have a look at this: Either I'm losing my debating touch or you're taking my arguments a long ways away from where they were aimed. I responded to Hakan Falk who seemed to think that Robertson had already broken the law and wondered why he hasn't been already arrested. My central point is that expressing your opinion that the CIA ought to assasinate someone isn't breaking any laws. Period. That's it. That is the answer to Hakans question. I don't doubt for a second that there are people within the current administration and all the various arms of intelligence and defense who would like to assasinate Chavez because he's not sufficiently pro-American. I am not one of them. I do not support Robertson. I did not support the current administration in their drive to war in Iraq. I do not support all the meddling we have done in the affairs of foreign states. But that does not make Robertsons statement illegal. He's expressing a moronic, immoral opinion, not calling people to action. I'm not trying to support Robertson, just trying to defend free speech. You see if you want to be able to speak freely you have to let others do so too, even if you don't like what they say. There is no society that doesn't put restrictions on free speech, of necessity, and it's a very difficult line to draw. Inciting to violence is a case in point - it's obvious? Maybe, but it's a restriction of free speech just the same, and there are many others, along with a constantly shifting grey area. You'd best watch what you wish for, IMHO. The US government over the last few administrations, and this administration in particular, seems very interested in quashing dissent. Imagine the effect on dissent if we were to stifle the kind of hateful speech which may be the way the administration is already thinking. And I'd suggest that people here think along those lines. Nothing new to us David. But it's more than just a label, or maybe less. You're making a mistake in writing off much of this discussion as rhetoric, as you did. If you took a less blinkered look you'd see that a great deal of information has been provided, the list archives is now a good resource on Pat Robertson. Any future discussion here of Pat Robertson or of any similar event will be better informed from the start, as with many other subjects. And that's what's needed as a true basis for free speech - free information. The true enemy of free speech and all freedom is spin as much as fascism, IMHO, and Pat Robertson has provided us with yet another example of that too. Several. I agree with you about the spin. But the topic at hand was whether Robertson should have already been arrested for his comments. Are you really agreeing with Hakan that he should have been? If expressing the opinion that a criminal act would have a desirable outcome becomes a crime then free speech no longer exists. IE, if someone suggests that the world would be a better place without Bush are you calling for a crime to be committed and subject to arrest? In the US we call that dissent, These days you (pl) call it treason as much as anything else. What's the punishment for treason in the US? See, here's where I think you blow it. If anyone who doesn't think Robertson should be arrested for his comments is one of them then there's not much hope left IMHO. I don't agree with Robertson. I think he's an arrogant fool.
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hello David Either I'm losing my debating touch or you're taking my arguments a long ways away from where they were aimed. Not from where they're aimed, but perhaps where they came from. I think you're sitting in an armchair, and this ain't no armchair. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you've had much to do with free speech outside theorising. I have though, it's my life-long profession after all, I've fought for it and defended it in places where there was no freedom of speech and where inconvenient people tended to get conveniently vanished. Thus: You'd best watch what you wish for, IMHO. The US government over the last few administrations, and this administration in particular, seems very interested in quashing dissent. Imagine the effect on dissent if we were to stifle the kind of hateful speech which may be the way the administration is already thinking. We went through that stage of of the debate 40 years ago David. I know very well what I wish for and just what the stakes are. I don't think you do though. Read it again without being so defensive and you might see what I mean. I've been where you fear the US might be (is) headed, more than once, and I'm not the only one here who can say that. I made a statement and it's true: There is no society that doesn't put restrictions on free speech, of necessity, and it's a very difficult line to draw. Inciting to violence is a case in point - it's obvious? Maybe, but it's a restriction of free speech just the same, and there are many others, along with a constantly shifting grey area. Treat it as a false sacred cow the way you're doing and watch it erode. Or more likely fail to notice it eroding because you're looking in the wrong direction. Hi Keith:) I expect that's covered under free speech. I'd personally rate Robertsons comments as up there with any number of people who advocate the death of Bush for crimes against humanity or somesuch. If Bush were assasinated would these people really be responsible? Maybe I didn't notice but I have not heard of anyone calling for the death of Bush. Excepting some of the victims of course, but not anybody in the US, which I think is what you're talking about. Surely you could imagine such a thing? Perhaps around a coffee table? My imagination's quite intact thankyou, but you twice propose this any number of people calling for Bush's death to support your argument and now it turns out they're imaginery. Is it you who's sitting around a coffee table? Offering your opinion that X should be assasinated either is or is not a crime; whether it's done on national TV or around the neighborhood watering hole is really irrelevent. If what's a crime is so clearcut then what's the role of the courts? What if Chavez is murdered is murdered and CIA is behind it, will he not be pursued for suggesting it? I don't believe so. The idea that the CIA would do something because this nut thought it was a good idea is laughable. Take a step back and listen to yourself. Does anyone on this list thing anyone at the CIA is going to wake up and say HEY! Robertson thinks we should assasinate a foreign head of state! Guess we'd better start laying plans C'mon, that's just silly. I'd be surprised if there weren't at least elements within the CIA who're thinking the same way as Robertson. I think the administration thinks the same way as Robertson. A lot of people think that. I think Chavez thinks that too. Have a look at this: Either I'm losing my debating touch or you're taking my arguments a long ways away from where they were aimed. Not at all. Unlike your imaginery Kill Bush squad, this is all too real. There's nothing laughable nor imaginery about the prospect of the CIA killing Chavez. You're just a bit dismayed because I've put the spotlight on the context of your arguments. Personally I think the CIA or whoever must be furious with Robertson, he's made it more difficult for them to kill Chavez. I'm sure they're working on that, working hard. I responded to Hakan Falk who seemed to think that Robertson had already broken the law and wondered why he hasn't been already arrested. My central point is that expressing your opinion that the CIA ought to assasinate someone isn't breaking any laws. It's two-sided though, as others have pointed out, and in your anxiety over free speech you seem to miss that. In making your central point you made other points and assertions which don't stand up very well, but you made them, and retreating to your central point isn't an option. Period. That's it. That is the answer to Hakans question. I wonder if Hakan thinks so. I don't doubt for a second that there are people within the current administration and all the various arms of intelligence and defense who would like to assasinate Chavez because he's not sufficiently pro-American. Sufficiently pro-American **INTERESTS**, specifically concerning
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hello Clif Keith Addison wrote: My my. And I was just thinking you might be a man who'd do a bit of checking before he shot his foot off. Again. I do rather wonder what you mean when you say right here in America when actually where you are right now is right here on the global Internet, on a global discussion group with a global membership that includes many Muslims living in Muslim countries, who are probably more aware than you are of calls from your country - calls and deeds done - to kill them and their leaders. But that doesn't count, does it? It does here. If you want outrage over the coverage of the war in Iraq you'll find it aplenty, but you won't like it - it's outrage at the unquestioning, knee-jerk coverage your so-called liberal press (ROFL!!!) gave to the pack of blatant lies that led unfailingly to everything and everybody getting torn to pieces in Iraq (as most of us predicted at the time), including your precious military, and every single promise broken. Guilty as accused concerning not backing up my statements. I have remedied this in another post. Well, you haven't given Fred any work, each and every one of your refs has been debunked many times before and it's all in the archives. In Iraq, we're not fighting for ourselves, said Bean, from his home base in Fort Campbell, Ky. We're over there fighting so the Iraqis can have their own Fourth of July. LOL! Yeah, it's not funny, but black humour's a survival trait these days. And guilty as accused as writing from a decidingly US perspective. I have traveled extensively including performing tsunami relief (as a civilian paying my own way) in Banda Aceh, Indonesia (90+ % Isalmic). Please understand that I have cried with, struggled with and even prayed with Muslims and Christians all over the world. (I have carried out humanitarian efforts in Central and South America and Jordan also.) Unfortunately I was not as sensitive as I should have been to all the readers of this list. I am a former officer in the USAF So you keep saying. so perhaps I do have a fondness for the fine, exceedingly capable and patriotic men and women serving to protect and defend a country Americans are inclined to be VERY careful about seeming to criticise that, most will pay it due obeisance. But most people here are not Americans and can be expected to treat it as the false sacred cow that it is. Again, please see the archives, we've had Purple Heart-winning US vets arguing with each here before this. So you might as well stop saying it, it doesn't secure you any high ground. I personally feel is a pretty good place to live. Perhaps I am living under some delusions and if that is the case then I'm sure someone will try to correct the errors of my ways. Thanks for the input. I will give it some thought. Just a guy sorting things out, I wonder. I think you're trolling. You slip in and lay some flame-bait, it duly raises noise and distraction, then you're all penitent about it, and then you do it again, twice so far. I'm not convinced by your penitence this time, and there won't be a third time. Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Clif Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : What exactly do you mean by that? Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. It is not far away from renewable energy sources. I think you should read this carefully, since it looks as if you haven't already done so: http://sustainablelists.org/pipermail/biofuel_sustainablelists.org/200 5-May/07.html Or: http://snipurl.com/gi45 Best wishes Keith In need of clarity, Clif TarynToo wrote: Amen Robert! snip ___ Biofuel mailing list
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
David, What you are saying is that if I officially said that CIA should kill Bush, before he get US in irreversible trouble, then I am not doing anything illegal. I do not personally belive that this should be done or that anyone seriously should suggest this, but I wonder what happened if I said so. I know that emails are screened and scrutinized, so this one might end up with CIA/FBI anyway and I sincerely hope that they dot not take it seriously or belive that I in any way would do a serious suggestion like the one Robertson did. Such suggestions are illegal and despicable, as the Robertson's one. I do think that when it comes to Chaves, the law will not be pursued and if it would be Bush he suggested, Robertson would now face serious interrogations. The fact is that US has a law, which prohibits any targeted killing of foreign leaders. This law was introduced during the Carter administration, I belive. This was frequently discussed during the bombings of Baghdad. But if they would have killed Saddam by accident, it was ok, but to target him personally was not. I remember when the Iranian Mullahs suggested the a true Muslim should kill a certain author, for insulting the Koran, and how all western leaders was upset by this kind of barbaric behavior and how it would not be allowed in the civilized western world. Robertson, a US religious leader, is doing exactly the same and now the same leaders are full of excuses for him. I do think that if Robertson suggested that Bush should have sex with Madonna, then he would have been history by now. This even if it would have been legal. LOL Hakan At 04:33 27/08/2005, you wrote: Keith Addison wrote: Hello David Hi Keith:) I expect that's covered under free speech. I'd personally rate Robertsons comments as up there with any number of people who advocate the death of Bush for crimes against humanity or somesuch. If Bush were assasinated would these people really be responsible? Maybe I didn't notice but I have not heard of anyone calling for the death of Bush. Excepting some of the victims of course, but not anybody in the US, which I think is what you're talking about. Surely you could imagine such a thing? Perhaps around a coffee table? Offering your opinion that X should be assasinated either is or is not a crime; whether it's done on national TV or around the neighborhood watering hole is really irrelevent. What if Chavez is murdered is murdered and CIA is behind it, will he not be pursued for suggesting it? I don't believe so. The idea that the CIA would do something because this nut thought it was a good idea is laughable. Take a step back and listen to yourself. Does anyone on this list thing anyone at the CIA is going to wake up and say HEY! Robertson thinks we should assasinate a foreign head of state! Guess we'd better start laying plans C'mon, that's just silly. I'd be surprised if there weren't at least elements within the CIA who're thinking the same way as Robertson. I think the administration thinks the same way as Robertson. A lot of people think that. I think Chavez thinks that too. Have a look at this: Either I'm losing my debating touch or you're taking my arguments a long ways away from where they were aimed. I responded to Hakan Falk who seemed to think that Robertson had already broken the law and wondered why he hasn't been already arrested. My central point is that expressing your opinion that the CIA ought to assasinate someone isn't breaking any laws. Period. That's it. That is the answer to Hakans question. I don't doubt for a second that there are people within the current administration and all the various arms of intelligence and defense who would like to assasinate Chavez because he's not sufficiently pro-American. I am not one of them. I do not support Robertson. I did not support the current administration in their drive to war in Iraq. I do not support all the meddling we have done in the affairs of foreign states. But that does not make Robertsons statement illegal. He's expressing a moronic, immoral opinion, not calling people to action. I'm not trying to support Robertson, just trying to defend free speech. You see if you want to be able to speak freely you have to let others do so too, even if you don't like what they say. There is no society that doesn't put restrictions on free speech, of necessity, and it's a very difficult line to draw. Inciting to violence is a case in point - it's obvious? Maybe, but it's a restriction of free speech just the same, and there are many others, along with a constantly shifting grey area. You'd best watch what you wish for, IMHO. The US government over the last few administrations, and this administration in particular, seems very interested in quashing dissent. Imagine the effect on dissent if we were to stifle the kind of hateful speech which may be
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Non-mythology about the news from Iraq: Cindy Sheehan speaks to crowd at Camp Casey Casey was killed by insurgents. He wasn't killed by terrorists. He was killed by Shiite militia who wanted him out of the country. Audio and transcript http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9980.htm http://snipurl.com/h7y6 Today's instalment of headline news from Iraq, from Tom Feeley at ICH. It's just a slice, what it's a slice of is also just a slice, and if it's good it's probably BS. The grim reality of Iraq rarely appears in the American press... The real good news is that life manages to go on anyway somehow or other in the face of it all. I guess they just got good at it as things went from bad to worse for the last 25 years, and especially since the US invasion. 36 executed bodies found in Iraq: Iraqi police on Thursday found the bodies of 36 men executed with a bullet to the head and dumped in a stream south of Baghdad, an interior ministry source said. http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=14378 http://snipurl.com/h7yd === 25 dead as militias clash in gun battles: AT LEAST 17 people were killed in Baghdad last night as gun battles erupted following a suicide car bomb attack on police. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-1749830,00.html http://snipurl.com/h7ye === 8 Killed In Continuing Violence: Near Baquba, gunmen opened fire on a bus carrying Shiite pilgrims who were heading home after visiting holy sites in Iran, killing four. In Oudiam, 40 miles north of Baquba, a roadside bomb killed four Iraqi engineers working for a cell phone company. http://snipurl.com/h7yf === Six shot dead in Iraqi cafe: Six Iraqi civilians have been killed and 15 others have been wounded, when gunmen burst into a popular cafe in a town north of Baghdad. http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200508/s1446278.htm http://snipurl.com/h7yg === 3 Killed In Attack : A Filipino contract worker has been killed in an ambush by suspected insurgents. Two Iraqi companions also died in an attack in the Iraqi city of Kirkuk http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/news/stories/s1446330.htm http://snipurl.com/h7yh === Gunmen kill two bodyguards of Iraqi president : Gunmen shot dead two bodyguards of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and wounded seven others in an attack north of Baghdad on Thursday, police said. http://snipurl.com/h7yi === Mortar attacks kill two Iraqis: Hospital officials say at least eight others have been injured in the strikes, including seven school children. http://www.wane.com/Global/story.asp?S=3359521 http://snipurl.com/h7yk === Suspect Insurgent Killed: One insurgent was killed and two injured in clashes with Iraqi soldiers in Baghdad's upscale district of Yarmouk http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9969.htm http://snipurl.com/h7yl === Gunmen Kill One at Shi'ite mosque in Baquba http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L25004640.htm http://snipurl.com/h7ym === Iraq Shi'ite militias fight as splits emerge: At least eight people were killed and dozens wounded, health officials said, in street battles in Najaf involving pro- government fighters and supporters of Sadr, who has joined Sunni Arab leaders in denouncing the constitution as divisive. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9969.htm http://snipurl.com/h7yl === Iraq cleric urges followers to end clashes: A Shiite cleric called on his followers Thursday to end clashes with Shiite rivals so that stalled talks on a new constitution can proceed. Fighting continued for a second day after the cleric's office in Najaf was burned and four of his supporters were killed. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9972.htm http://snipurl.com/h7yn === Clashes between Badr and Sadr : Earlier this evening, Moqtada gave the Jaafari government an hour to explain, pull back or apologize for these attacks. He also called on his supporters in parliament, Fatah and others from the NICE list, to resign because “Moqtada now considers the government illegal,” http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9970.htm http://snipurl.com/h7yp === Juan Cole : Bloody Shiite on Shiite Clashes in the South : Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari condemned the violence in Najaf and called for an end to the politics of the gun. He said that the attack on the Sadr offices was unacceptable and deplored violence in the holy city of Najaf. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9973.htm http://snipurl.com/h7yq === Shite Party Offices Attacked In Basara: It is thought that the missile attack may be the work of supporters of the radical Shiite Imam Moqtada al-Sadr, in retaliation for previous attacks on al-Sadr's headquarters, which were blamed on members of the Badr organisation. http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Terrorismloid=8.0.200617994par= http://snipurl.com/h7yr === Iraq Lawmakers Won't Meet on Constitution : Parliament announced it had no plans to meet
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hello Cliff, I am a former officer in the USAF so perhaps I do have a fondness for the fine, exceedingly capable and patriotic men and women serving to protect and defend a country I personally feel is a pretty good place to live. Perhaps I am living under some delusions and if that is the case then I'm sure someone will try to correct the errors of my ways. Just a quick point or two from another who is also looking for the path... The USA is, in fact, a pretty good place to live, but it is far from an innocent victim, as many who live here choose to believe. The historical sortcomings of this county deserve much closer scrutiny if you hope to live an enlightened life as a modern US citizen. May I suggest a book? Howard Zinn's masterpiece A People's History of of the United States should be required reading for all US citizens (even a naturalized citizen like me!); it will help shine an honest light on the historical behavior of our country, to the contrary of much that we read in our shool history books. After that, perhaps, a brief foray into Noam Chomsky can really put a point on the very recent history of US hegemony and covert interventionism (Chile, El Salvador, Nicaragua, etc.) particularly in the name of battling communism and terrorism... or as GHW Bush put it, defending the non-negotiable American lifestyle. Thanks for listening to my two cents worth... Oh, and thank you for your service to our country. May those exceedingly capable men and women of which you speak be brought home to focus that energy on more constructive pursuits! Be well, Sean Michael Dargan Madison, WI P.S. I, too, hope to hear more about titration before long! Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Greetings to all, I am an avid alternative fuel advocate who is building a large home sized processor. I do hope you will read this and maybe it will help get us back on track!!All this talk of politics as far as I am concerned is for the most part way out of line,and with a lot of misconceptions toward a political adjenda.We All need to get focused on what and where we are headed with the alternative energy issues,and stop talking about all these politics, and put our time and money where our mouths are and DO Something constructive !! Sincerly Spoken.Duff Streeter --- Sean Michael Dargan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Cliff, I am a former officer in the USAF so perhaps I do have a fondness for the fine, exceedingly capable and patriotic men and women serving to protect and defend a country I personally feel is a pretty good place to live. Perhaps I am living under some delusions and if that is the case then I'm sure someone will try to correct the errors of my ways. Just a quick point or two from another who is also looking for the path... The USA is, in fact, a pretty good place to live, but it is far from an innocent victim, as many who live here choose to believe. The historical sortcomings of this county deserve much closer scrutiny if you hope to live an enlightened life as a modern US citizen. May I suggest a book? Howard Zinn's masterpiece A People's History of of the United States should be required reading for all US citizens (even a naturalized citizen like me!); it will help shine an honest light on the historical behavior of our country, to the contrary of much that we read in our shool history books. After that, perhaps, a brief foray into Noam Chomsky can really put a point on the very recent history of US hegemony and covert interventionism (Chile, El Salvador, Nicaragua, etc.) particularly in the name of battling communism and terrorism... or as GHW Bush put it, defending the non-negotiable American lifestyle. Thanks for listening to my two cents worth... Oh, and thank you for your service to our country. May those exceedingly capable men and women of which you speak be brought home to focus that energy on more constructive pursuits! Be well, Sean Michael Dargan Madison, WI P.S. I, too, hope to hear more about titration before long! Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Well done Keith. So here we are again, stating the obvious,setting the record straight about a war which violates international laws (which the US helped write, then signed onto)related tojustification for war, engagement,torture, detainment and the fabrication of the term "enemy combatant" which has effectively stripped people of the most basic human rights and left the accuser to decide guilt and length of detainment. It'sfrightening how the rhetoric says thatthe USis "the land of the free" and that it is a model for democracy which should be imposed on other countries considering the fact that there are 4000federal laws on the books and some of them, along with manystate laws dictate what is permissible (or not) in your personal life. For example, in at least two states, it's ILLEGAL for a male and femaleto cohabitate unlessthey are married. In my opinion,youcan measure how close a country is to being a police state by the number of laws it has. I say all this without even getting started on the constitutional violations contained in the USA Patriot act (as many of us are already aware and have already discussed). Then there is my personal favorite, the sedition act of 1918: "...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States..." When asked about people in US history who I admire most, I will enthusiastically talk about those who have defendedand sometimes dieddefendingfreedomwithin it'sborders. Coincidentally, few of those people are politicians. MikeKeith Addison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My my. And I was just thinking you might be a man who'd do a bit of checking before he shot his foot off. Again. I do rather wonder what you mean when you say "right here in America" when actually where you are right now is right here on the global Internet, on a global discussion group with a global membership that includes many Muslims living in Muslim countries, who are probably more aware than you are of calls from your country - calls and deeds done - to kill them and their leaders. But that doesn't count, does it? It does here. If you want outrage over the coverage of the war in Iraq you'll find it aplenty, but you won't like it - it's outrage at the unquestioning, knee-jerk coverage your so-called "liberal" press (ROFL!!!) gave to the pack of blatant lies that led unfailingly to everything and everybody getting torn to pieces in Iraq (as most of us predicted at the time), including your precious military, and every single promise broken.Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure outhow to titrate WVO correctly.At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames ..Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ?Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ?Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous othersare doing at peddling lies ?Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers whoare proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in theArmed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother isgiven weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ?And finally a point that may need some attention by the "Men of God"judicatory committee on this list :What exactly do you mean by that?Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America todaily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believethat Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels?All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious ofmy own "blind spots" as I am chief among those who can stand only bygrace .Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away fromrenewable energy sources.It is not far away from renewable energy sources. I think you should read this carefully, since it looks as if you haven't already done so:http://sustainablelists.org/pipermail/biofuel_sustainablelists.org/200 5-May/07.htmlOr:http://snipurl.com/gi45Best wishesKeith___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
ardis streeter wrote: All this talk of politics as far as I am concerned is for the most part way out of line,and with a lot of misconceptions toward a political adjenda. Don't go there! Didn't you read the welcome message when you first subscribed? robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.newadventure.ca Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hallo Folks, Saturday, 27 August, 2005, 11:51:31, you wrote: rlr ardis streeter wrote: All this talk of politics as far as I am concerned is for the most part way out of line,and with a lot of misconceptions toward a political adjenda. rlr Don't go there! Didn't you read the welcome message when you rlr first subscribed? rlr robert luis rabello Ja, let's not go there. Let us go here instead. Unless people have all the information they are able they will not be able to make intelligent or wise decisions. We need to know that when we are told something that the source is routinely as accurate and truthful as possible and we need to know which sources are not so we can stay away from those. There are folks out there, and I know some of them, who limit their input to sources which reflect only their particular mindset and they reject information from other sources as false or biased whether or not that is indeed true. They want the world to be a mirror image of their cherished beliefs whether or not the beliefs are true, good or wise. That makes no sense. I believe I have said this before but I believe that the information we garner and through which we sift is biofuel for the mind. Politics may be and often is heavily discussed but through this we gain an understanding of others who may be vastly different from ourselves and we come to learn that although there are many differences we have a common thread running through this which is that we wish good for ourselves and no harm to others. What gets in the way of this is partisanship whether it is religious, political, economic, racial or whatever else. Through these discussions we get closer to the truth of things and become closer to being an organic whole. If we are to become the best people we can be living in the best world we can we need to listen to others and examine ourselves and if we find ourselves lacking we need to get into line with what is right and good or if we find others lacking we need to point it out to them so that they have the same opportunity of getting into line with that which is right and good. To limit the discourse on this list to the physical mechanics of biofuel production is to limit ones understanding of what biofuel is and what it can become. If you are not prepared to expand your limits friend then you have chosen the wrong list. This is where the sorting and weeding is done. This is the place where we become part of the one, friends. We point out the flaws where we find them that we may understand more and correct the mistakes we find in ourselves and elsewhere as we are able. Welcome to biofuels. ;o) Happy Happy, Gustl -- Je mehr wir haben, desto mehr fordert Gott von uns. We can't change the winds but we can adjust our sails. The safest road to Hell is the gradual one - the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters Es gibt Wahrheiten, die so sehr auf der Straße liegen, daß sie gerade deshalb von der gewöhnlichen Welt nicht gesehen oder wenigstens nicht erkannt werden. Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music. George Carlin The best portion of a good man's life - His little, nameless, unremembered acts of kindness and of love. William Wordsworth ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Well said Gustl, This list has proven to me how little I know, so many times. Bright Blessings, Kim At 11:34 AM 8/27/2005, you wrote: Hallo Folks, Ja, let's not go there. Let us go here instead. Unless people have all the information they are able they will not be able to make intelligent or wise decisions. We need to know that when we are told something that the source is routinely as accurate and truthful as possible and we need to know which sources are not so we can stay away from those. There are folks out there, and I know some of them, who limit their input to sources which reflect only their particular mindset and they reject information from other sources as false or biased whether or not that is indeed true. They want the world to be a mirror image of their cherished beliefs whether or not the beliefs are true, good or wise. That makes no sense. I believe I have said this before but I believe that the information we garner and through which we sift is biofuel for the mind. Politics may be and often is heavily discussed but through this we gain an understanding of others who may be vastly different from ourselves and we come to learn that although there are many differences we have a common thread running through this which is that we wish good for ourselves and no harm to others. What gets in the way of this is partisanship whether it is religious, political, economic, racial or whatever else. Through these discussions we get closer to the truth of things and become closer to being an organic whole. If we are to become the best people we can be living in the best world we can we need to listen to others and examine ourselves and if we find ourselves lacking we need to get into line with what is right and good or if we find others lacking we need to point it out to them so that they have the same opportunity of getting into line with that which is right and good. To limit the discourse on this list to the physical mechanics of biofuel production is to limit ones understanding of what biofuel is and what it can become. If you are not prepared to expand your limits friend then you have chosen the wrong list. This is where the sorting and weeding is done. This is the place where we become part of the one, friends. We point out the flaws where we find them that we may understand more and correct the mistakes we find in ourselves and elsewhere as we are able. Welcome to biofuels. ;o) Happy Happy, Gustl -- ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Greetings to all, I am an avid alternative fuel advocate who is building a large home sized processor. I do hope you will read this and maybe it will help get us back on track!!All this talk of politics as far as I am concerned is for the most part way out of line,and with a lot of misconceptions toward a political adjenda.We All need to get focused on what and where we are headed with the alternative energy issues,and stop talking about all these politics, and put our time and money where our mouths are and DO Something constructive !! Sincerly Spoken.Duff Streeter Exit Duff Streeter. Sad to say, after more than two years. But he was told about this, like everyone else - twice in his case: List rules: http://sustainablelists.org/pipermail/biofuel_sustainablelists.org/200 5-May/07.html Or: http://snipurl.com/gi45 See Open discussion, and the Note at the end: There aren't a lot of rules, but that is one of them: no calls for restricted discussion. It's a discussion list, not a less-discussion list. In other words, NO TOPIC-COPS! From a recent post, Robert's reply to Clif: Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. Some of these issues may seem tangential at first. Close examination, however, will reveal how energy use, foreign policy, religious perspective, racism and many other isms blend to create the overall milieu in which the topic of biofuels exist. We who have been here for any length of time agree by consensus that which is deserving of discussion and that which is not. It's remarkably self regulating, for the most part. Yes it is, for the most part. Once again, nobody's forcing anyone to read anything they don't want to read, messages have subject titles after all. What does it amount to anyway? You're only allowed to talk about what **I** want to talk about? Usually it's either that or a poorly disguised demand for censorship. Or a complaint that there isn't any censorship, which looks like Duff's case. Not that he'd call it censorship. Ho-hum. Anyway, the rule is enforced. Best wishes Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner --- Sean Michael Dargan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Cliff, I am a former officer in the USAF so perhaps I do have a fondness for the fine, exceedingly capable and patriotic men and women serving to protect and defend a country I personally feel is a pretty good place to live. Perhaps I am living under some delusions and if that is the case then I'm sure someone will try to correct the errors of my ways. Just a quick point or two from another who is also looking for the path... The USA is, in fact, a pretty good place to live, but it is far from an innocent victim, as many who live here choose to believe. The historical sortcomings of this county deserve much closer scrutiny if you hope to live an enlightened life as a modern US citizen. May I suggest a book? Howard Zinn's masterpiece A People's History of of the United States should be required reading for all US citizens (even a naturalized citizen like me!); it will help shine an honest light on the historical behavior of our country, to the contrary of much that we read in our shool history books. After that, perhaps, a brief foray into Noam Chomsky can really put a point on the very recent history of US hegemony and covert interventionism (Chile, El Salvador, Nicaragua, etc.) particularly in the name of battling communism and terrorism... or as GHW Bush put it, defending the non-negotiable American lifestyle. Thanks for listening to my two cents worth... Oh, and thank you for your service to our country. May those exceedingly capable men and women of which you speak be brought home to focus that energy on more constructive pursuits! Be well, Sean Michael Dargan Madison, WI P.S. I, too, hope to hear more about titration before long! ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
If nothing else, these political discussions do get everyone to come out and talk. I think it is great. Freedom of speech is still alive here, whether we talk about making alternative fuel, or politics. I agree that talking is where it's at. Besides, as a newcomer, when I ask questions about making some form of biofuel, I find out they have been extensively covered in the archives. I don't blame anyone for wanting to talk about what is happening in current events. As an alternative style technician, I get a little tired of the same old questions from people that don't care to figure it out for themselves at least a little bit before they ask. Keep on, keeping on. I do feel a little quilty because for the most part I have not experimented with any of the biofuels ideas I have received here. This is not for lack of effort on my part. I am working hard to get my workshop back together after a few years of total inactivity. One of the things I have acomplished is to track down and reconnect with a local metal fabricator whom I hope to have inspired to help me design and create the processor drums for my ethanol projects and my new found enthusiasm for making bio-diesel. In fact, a friend has offered her Mercedes Benz 300TD. Now I have more motivation to get real and we all know the hardest part of any project is getting started. Sincerely, Brian Rodgers. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Dogonnit Keith, If the guy is going to behave in such a fashion, those who have to suffer it should at least be able to grill him about his generalities and stereotyping until he's forced to admit that there is a lot more to the bag of beans than he would care to recognize. Just throttling the guy lets him off too easy. Now it's he who gets to claim that his sensibilities were offended, further enforcing and propigating his peculiar beliefs elsewhere. Give 'em enough rope to hang themselves. If they're smart, they won't use it all. If they aren't, the world should at least be given the pleasure of watching them swing at the end of the yardarm of their own making. Todd Swearingen Keith Addison wrote: Greetings to all, I am an avid alternative fuel advocate who is building a large home sized processor. I do hope you will read this and maybe it will help get us back on track!!All this talk of politics as far as I am concerned is for the most part way out of line,and with a lot of misconceptions toward a political adjenda.We All need to get focused on what and where we are headed with the alternative energy issues,and stop talking about all these politics, and put our time and money where our mouths are and DO Something constructive !! Sincerly Spoken.Duff Streeter Exit Duff Streeter. Sad to say, after more than two years. But he was told about this, like everyone else - twice in his case: List rules: http://sustainablelists.org/pipermail/biofuel_sustainablelists.org/200 5-May/07.html Or: http://snipurl.com/gi45 See Open discussion, and the Note at the end: There aren't a lot of rules, but that is one of them: no calls for restricted discussion. It's a discussion list, not a less-discussion list. In other words, NO TOPIC-COPS! From a recent post, Robert's reply to Clif: Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. Some of these issues may seem tangential at first. Close examination, however, will reveal how energy use, foreign policy, religious perspective, racism and many other isms blend to create the overall milieu in which the topic of biofuels exist. We who have been here for any length of time agree by consensus that which is deserving of discussion and that which is not. It's remarkably self regulating, for the most part. Yes it is, for the most part. Once again, nobody's forcing anyone to read anything they don't want to read, messages have subject titles after all. What does it amount to anyway? You're only allowed to talk about what **I** want to talk about? Usually it's either that or a poorly disguised demand for censorship. Or a complaint that there isn't any censorship, which looks like Duff's case. Not that he'd call it censorship. Ho-hum. Anyway, the rule is enforced. Best wishes Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner --- Sean Michael Dargan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Cliff, I am a former officer in the USAF so perhaps I do have a fondness for the fine, exceedingly capable and patriotic men and women serving to protect and defend a country I personally feel is a pretty good place to live. Perhaps I am living under some delusions and if that is the case then I'm sure someone will try to correct the errors of my ways. Just a quick point or two from another who is also looking for the path... The USA is, in fact, a pretty good place to live, but it is far from an innocent victim, as many who live here choose to believe. The historical sortcomings of this county deserve much closer scrutiny if you hope to live an enlightened life as a modern US citizen. May I suggest a book? Howard Zinn's masterpiece A People's History of of the United States should be required reading for all US citizens (even a naturalized citizen like me!); it will help shine an honest light on the historical behavior of our country, to the contrary of much that we read in our shool history books. After that, perhaps, a brief foray into Noam Chomsky can really put a point on the very recent history of US hegemony and covert interventionism (Chile, El Salvador, Nicaragua, etc.) particularly in the name of battling communism and terrorism... or as GHW Bush put it, defending the non-negotiable American lifestyle. Thanks for listening to my two cents worth... Oh, and thank you for your service to our country. May those exceedingly capable men and women of which you speak be brought home to focus that energy on more constructive pursuits! Be well, Sean Michael Dargan Madison, WI P.S. I, too, hope to hear more about titration before long! ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Dear List, A bit about the legal ramifications, though there will be none, of Pat Robertson's statements concerning Chavez. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20050826.html by John Dean . Cheers, S. Chapin ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Thanks: I find that illuminating to say the least. I personally hope that the US does take this further, otherwise how can they insist foreign powers prosecute their citizens for similar acts (including for instance statements by Mullahs) regards Doug On Sunday 28 August 2005 8:26, S. Chapin wrote: Dear List, A bit about the legal ramifications, though there will be none, of Pat Robertson's statements concerning Chavez. http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20050826.html by John Dean . Cheers, S. Chapin ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
There are any number of people who are calling for Bush to be tried for treason and war crimes. We certainly don't want him to be assassinated! God forbid, we don't need any NeoCon martyrs here. We do expect that he and most of his cabinet will be hung or imprisoned after the trials http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/ usc_sec_18_2381000-.html We're not calling for murder, we're calling for justice and return to the rule of law. Taryn ornae.com Keith said to David who said to Keith I'd personally rate Robertsons comments as up there with any number of people who advocate the death of Bush for crimes against humanity or somesuch. If Bush were assasinated would these people really be responsible? Maybe I didn't notice but I have not heard of anyone calling for the death of Bush. Excepting some of the victims of course, but not anybody in the US, which I think is what you're talking about. Surely you could imagine such a thing? Perhaps around a coffee table? My imagination's quite intact thankyou, but you twice propose this any number of people calling for Bush's death to support your argument and now it turns out they're imaginery. Is it you who's sitting around a coffee table? ... and much more... ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hello Keith, As I am fairly new to this list I should have done some achive research before posting. My bad . You obviously have spent quite some time arguing your opinion on these political issues. I have not. I spoke from my convictions not from my expertise. As far as /trolling/ I must admit I am unfamiliar with this term. I assume it has to do with a certain type of behavior on mailing lists or in chat rooms. Since I have very little experience in either arena I will do my best not to do this in the future. I may not be the brightest bulb in the box but I do learn. From now on I will allow these political issues and religious issues to be discussed here without my input. With my somewhat limited verbal sparring skills and my deep seated convictions I would simply get in the way of /meaningful /discussions. Is this penitent enough for you ? The unanimously vehement reaction to my comments speaks volumes. Thanks for the education. It is all your's. I don't mind a good fight but why bother . I will limit my discussions to areas I know even less about, namely building my first biodiesel processor. Have at it. Signing off from this thread and any other remotely related threads. With warm (occassionally very warm) regards, Clif Keith Addison wrote: Hello Clif Keith Addison wrote: My my. And I was just thinking you might be a man who'd do a bit of checking before he shot his foot off. Again. I do rather wonder what you mean when you say right here in America when actually where you are right now is right here on the global Internet, on a global discussion group with a global membership that includes many Muslims living in Muslim countries, who are probably more aware than you are of calls from your country - calls and deeds done - to kill them and their leaders. But that doesn't count, does it? It does here. If you want outrage over the coverage of the war in Iraq you'll find it aplenty, but you won't like it - it's outrage at the unquestioning, knee-jerk coverage your so-called liberal press (ROFL!!!) gave to the pack of blatant lies that led unfailingly to everything and everybody getting torn to pieces in Iraq (as most of us predicted at the time), including your precious military, and every single promise broken. Guilty as accused concerning not backing up my statements. I have remedied this in another post. Well, you haven't given Fred any work, each and every one of your refs has been debunked many times before and it's all in the archives. In Iraq, we're not fighting for ourselves, said Bean, from his home base in Fort Campbell, Ky. We're over there fighting so the Iraqis can have their own Fourth of July. LOL! Yeah, it's not funny, but black humour's a survival trait these days. And guilty as accused as writing from a decidingly US perspective. I have traveled extensively including performing tsunami relief (as a civilian paying my own way) in Banda Aceh, Indonesia (90+ % Isalmic). Please understand that I have cried with, struggled with and even prayed with Muslims and Christians all over the world. (I have carried out humanitarian efforts in Central and South America and Jordan also.) Unfortunately I was not as sensitive as I should have been to all the readers of this list. I am a former officer in the USAF So you keep saying. so perhaps I do have a fondness for the fine, exceedingly capable and patriotic men and women serving to protect and defend a country Americans are inclined to be VERY careful about seeming to criticise that, most will pay it due obeisance. But most people here are not Americans and can be expected to treat it as the false sacred cow that it is. Again, please see the archives, we've had Purple Heart-winning US vets arguing with each here before this. So you might as well stop saying it, it doesn't secure you any high ground. I personally feel is a pretty good place to live. Perhaps I am living under some delusions and if that is the case then I'm sure someone will try to correct the errors of my ways. Thanks for the input. I will give it some thought. Just a guy sorting things out, I wonder. I think you're trolling. You slip in and lay some flame-bait, it duly raises noise and distraction, then you're all penitent about it, and then you do it again, twice so far. I'm not convinced by your penitence this time, and there won't be a third time. Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner Clif Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Where is the outrage
[Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? For example: I often forward news and interesting articles (much of which I find on this list, thanks to you all) to a few friends and family. I never get any responses. One of my friends I know is a 700 Club 'member' and his church preaches along the same political lines. After forwarding the news about Robertson's comments, I received this reply from my friend: "He is a passionate man who speaks from his heart and who has said some stupid stuff in the past and probably will say some stupid things in the future but he apologized and that's good in my book. Heck, it's alot more than most political or public figures would do." "Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement," Robertson said. "I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him." http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/24/robertson.chavez/index.html To which I responded with a more complete quote from Robertson's "apology", a page of links relating to Robertson's money-making operations in Africa (included at the bottom of this long email, in case anyone is interested) and a comment: "Obviously Pat Robertson does not have any business interests in common with Hugo Chavez, otherwise Robertson would be defending Chavez instead of condemning him." My friend's reply: -- "I heard from a story on NPR the other day regarding a current State Governor that when in the political spotlight and "riding a white horse" the dirt shows up easier. Too many resources have been wasted on putting Pat Roberts[on] on public "trial". Everyone knows that he is a religous man but the primary word in that description is "man". He is not God. Man makes mistakes. When shadey politicians make mistakes it's OK because nobody expects them to be perfect. I wish the world would focus on solutions to problems instead of dwelling on the faults of man. Spread that comment around the Internet and see where it gets you." -- Ok, so it's spreading. :-) My friend is no fool. He is perfectly capable of thinking logically and rationally. But from this irrational reply, I think we have clearly reached the point where my friend is not really defending Robertson but is actually defending himself since he sees himself associated with Robertson. If anyone has ever had the opportunity to watch a 700 Club broadcast, you will notice how softly and pleasantly they speak about helping the poor around the world and healing people. They give the impression of being 'good Christians' and that is how they get the cash from their listeners, who see their donation as doing something good to help others. So I can see how it would be easy to get sucked into their influence. For us on the 'outside', it is easy to view Robertson as a crazy demagogue on one hand and an astute, greedy business man on the other. But what does it take for those on the 'inside' to look at Robertson (or Bush or whoever) and say, "I've been deceived. That is not what I support."; to separate themselves from the object of criticism? I think that does happen in some cases. Or maybe, in other cases the people haven't been deceived, but they just don't care which means that they really aren't any different than the 'leader'. I hope I'm not delving into some social-psychology mumbo-jumbo that no-one is interested in? BT Obviously Pat Robertson does not have any business interests in common with Hugo Chavez, otherwise Robertson would be defending Chavez instead of condemning him. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson#Robertson.27s_advocacy_of_assassination_of_Venezuelan_President_Hugo_Ch.C3.A1vez On the August 24 edition of The 700 Club, Robertson attempted to clarify that he hadn't actually calling for Chvez's assassination, but that there were other ways of "taking him out", such as having special forces carry out a kidnapping. Robertson flatly denied using the word "assassination", despite video tape evidence that he did.[11] Later that day, he issued a written statement in which he said, "Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement." However, he continued to justify his original stance and called Chvez "a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil that could hurt us very badly".[12] He went on in the written statement to accuse Chvez of involvement with terrorism: "Col. Chavez [sic] has found common cause with terrorists such as the noted assassin Carlos the Jackal, has visited Iran reportedly to gain access to nuclear technology, and has referred to Saddam Hussein and Fidel Castro as his comrades. Col. Chavez also intends to fund the violent overthrow of democratically elected governments throughout South America, beginning with neighboring Colombia." [13]
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hi everybody, I do not know about Robertson, but thereare many so-called 'evangelists' whose sole purpose is to collect money from naive believers. My late mother once donated !R 200 to a well known TV evangelist.and received a hasty letter back from the guy stating that it wasn't enough even for one brick. God, what kind of bricks do you use anyway. The Indian evangelists often use resurrection trick to con target groups into parting with large amounts of cash. When one such fellow who was claiming how he resurrected a corpse noticed how I was frowning he turned me in anger. With these guys no public accounts are kept at all and everything goes into their pocket. One fellow here was exorcising a young girl with her dress up and sitting on him, not knowing a police party was watching him...I think anyone who collects money should be accountable to prevent fraudof the divine kind. LOLBT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists!The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders?For example:I often forward news and interesting articles (much of which I find on this list, thanks to you all) to a few friends and family. I never get any responses. One of my friends I know is a 700 Club 'member' and his church preaches along the same political lines. After forwarding the news about Robertson's comments, I received this reply from my friend: "He is a passionate man who speaks from his heart and who has said some stupid stuff in the past and probably will say some stupid things in the future but he apologized and that's good in my book. Heck, it's alot more than most political or public figures would do." "Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement," Robertson said. "I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him." http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/24/robertson.chavez/index.htmlTo which I responded with a more complete quote from Robertson's "apology", a page of links relating to Robertson's money-making operations in Africa (included at the bottom of this long email, in case anyone is interested) and a comment: "Obviously Pat Robertson does not have any business interests in common with Hugo Chavez, otherwise Robertson would be defending Chavez instead of condemning him." My friend's reply:-- "I heard from a story on NPR the other day regarding a current State Governor that when in the political spotlight and "riding a white horse" the dirt shows up easier. Too many resources have been wasted on putting Pat Roberts[on] on public "trial". Everyone knows that he is a religous man but the primary word in that description is "man". He is not God. Man makes mistakes. When shadey politicians make mistakes it's OK because nobody expects them to be perfect. I wish the world would focus on solutions to problems instead of dwelling on the faults of man. Spread that comment around the Internet and see where it gets you."-- Ok, so it's spreading. :-) My friend is no fool. He is perfectly capable of thinking logically and rationally. But from this irrational reply, I think we have clearly reached the point where my friend is not really defending Robertson but is actually defending himself since he sees himself associated with Robertson.If anyone has ever had the opportunity to watch a 700 Club broadcast, you will notice how softly and pleasantly they speak about helping the poor around the world and healing people. They give the impression of being 'good Christians' and that is how they get the cash from their listeners, who see their donation as doing something good to help others. So I can see how it would be easy to get sucked into their influence. For us on the 'outside', it is easy to view Robertson as a crazy demagogue on one hand and an astute, greedy business man on the other. But what does it take for those on the 'inside' to look at Robertson (or Bush or whoever) and say, "I've been deceived. That is not what I support."; to separate themselves from the object of criticism? I think that does happen in some cases. Or maybe, in other cases the people haven't been deceived, but they just don't care which means that they really aren't any different than the 'leader'. I hope I'm not delving into some social-psychology mumbo-jumbo that no-one is interested in? BT Obviously Pat Robertson does not have any business interests in common with Hugo Chavez, otherwise Robertson would be defending Chavez instead of condemning him. -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson#Robertson.27s_advocacy_of_assassination_of_Venezuelan_President_Hugo_Ch.C3.A1vez On the August 24 edition of The 700 Club, Robertson attempted to clarify that he hadn't actually calling for Chávez's assassination, but that there were other ways of "taking him out", such as having special forces carry out a kidnapping.
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
I once sent them (Oral Roberts?) a brick. They were asking for 25.00 to buy a brick, so I sent them a letter saying I could get a much better price and did they want more. Cost me something like 4.00 for 4th class postage but it was worth it. Manick Harris wrote: Hi everybody, I do not know about Robertson, but thereare many so-called 'evangelists' whose sole purpose is to collect money from naive believers. My late mother once donated !R 200 to a well known TV evangelist.and received a hasty letter back from the guy stating that it wasn't enough even for one brick. God, what kind of bricks do you use anyway. The Indian evangelists often use resurrection trick to con target groups into parting with large amounts of cash. When one such fellow who was claiming how he resurrected a corpse noticed how I was frowning he turned me in anger. With these guys no public accounts are kept at all and everything goes into their pocket. One fellow here was exorcising a young girl with her dress up and sitting on him, not knowing a police party was watching him...I think anyone who collects money should be accountable to prevent fraud of the divine kind. LOL */BT [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? For example: I often forward news and interesting articles (much of which I find on this list, thanks to you all) to a few friends and family. I never get any responses. One of my friends I know is a 700 Club 'member' and his church preaches along the same political lines. After forwarding the news about Robertson's comments, I received this reply from my friend: He is a passionate man who speaks from his heart and who has said some stupid stuff in the past and probably will say some stupid things in the future but he apologized and that's good in my book. Heck, it's alot more than most political or public figures would do. Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement, Robertson said. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him. http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/24/robertson.chavez/index.html To which I responded with a more complete quote from Robertson's apology, a page of links relating to Robertson's money-making operations in Africa (included at the bottom of this long email, in case anyone is interested) and a comment: Obviously Pat Robertson does not have any business interests in common with Hugo Chavez, otherwise Robertson would be defending Chavez instead of condemning him. My friend's reply: -- I heard from a story on NPR the other day regarding a current State Governor that when in the political spotlight and riding a white horse the dirt shows up easier. Too many resources have been wasted on putting Pat Roberts[on] on public trial. Everyone knows that he is a religous man but the primary word in that description is man. He is not God. Man makes mistakes. When shadey politicians make mistakes it's OK because nobody expects them to be perfect. I wish the world would focus on solutions to problems instead of dwelling on the faults of man. Spread that comment around the Internet and see where it gets you. -- Ok, so it's spreading. :-) My friend is no fool. He is perfectly capable of thinking logically and rationally. But from this irrational reply, I think we have clearly reached the point where my friend is not really defending Robertson but is actually defending himself since he sees himself associated with Robertson. If anyone has ever had the opportunity to watch a 700 Club broadcast, you will notice how softly and pleasantly they speak about helping the poor around the world and healing people. They give the impression of being 'good Christians' and that is how they get the cash from their listeners, who see their donation as doing something good to help others. So I can see how it would be easy to get sucked into their influence. For us on the 'outside', it is easy to view Robertson as a crazy demagogue on one hand and an astute, greedy business man on the other. But what does it take for those on the 'inside' to look at Robertson (or Bush or whoever) and say, I've been deceived. That is not what I support.; to separate themselves from the object of criticism? I think that does happen in some cases. Or maybe, in other cases the people haven't been deceived, but they just don't care which means that they really aren't any different than the 'leader'. I hope I'm not delving into some
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. When Jesus confronted the leaders of his day, he seldom had pleasant words for them for this very reason. Here is an example: Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. (There's a biofuel angle in there!) You brood of vipers! How can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned. (Matthew 12: 33 - 37) So, no higher authority than Jesus Christ himself condemns reckless rhetoric, and we who call ourselves Christians should not soft pedal this kind of behavior either. A man like Pat Robertson, who CLAIMS to be a Christian, should have read statements of this nature and taken them to heart long ago. When I complain about this kind of problem, I do so because it degrades the standing of the Christian faith in the eyes of nonbelievers who are watching. If I, a nobody, get upset when the name of God is blasphemed in this manner, shouldn't genuine Christian leaders roundly condemn the same behavior? After all, this is what the scriptures admonish: Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of wrongdoing, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us. (1 Peter 2: 12) And elsewhere: But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there WILL BE FALSE TEACHERS AMONG YOU. (Emphasis is mine.) They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed, these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up . . . (2 Peter 2: 1 - 3) The fact that Pat Robertson calls himself a Christian disgusts me for this very reason. He's not following the example of Jesus Christ, so by his actions, he denies Christ. If he's impulsive and can't control himself, he has no power from God. A person who calls himself a Christian is one who should know God very well. Therefore: We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, 'I know him', but does not do what he commands is a liar and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did. (1 John 2: 3 - 6) So then, if we examine what Jesus did, we will find a man who never sought harm for anyone else. He was a man who lived by high principle and spoke very carefully. He did not advocate violence, he did not stir up a mob to overthrow the Romans, he did not seek political power or financial gain. Therefore, if you see someone who claims to be a Christian doing these things, you can KNOW that he's a liar. Further on, you can read this: Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him. (1 John 3: 15) Now, I know that these faux Christians will say Those verses only apply to your Christian brother, because that's what they're programmed to say by the false teachers they follow. But the principles that Christians should follow transcend this worldly attitude. Once again, here's what Jesus actually taught: You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even the pagans do that? Be
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Robert, A question, In many countries death threat and instigation of murdering a person is against the criminal laws. Is it not the same in US and if, why have they not arrested and questioned Robertson? Hakan At 17:13 26/08/2005, you wrote: BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
--- Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In many countries death threat and instigation of murdering a person is against the criminal laws. Is it not the same in US and if, why have they not arrested and questioned Robertson? Because he is the darling of the far right Christian fundamentalists, even tho they pretend to distance themselves from him every time he says something outrageous, like feminists being Satanists, or the need to blow up the State Dept. with a nuclear device. That last one would get any left-winger tossed into Guantanamo till they rotted! -K Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
The other night on CNN Christpher Hitchens called Pat Robertson a babbling idiot and proof of unintelligent design - Original Message - From: robert luis rabello [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 11:13 AM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. When Jesus confronted the leaders of his day, he seldom had pleasant words for them for this very reason. Here is an example: Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. (There's a biofuel angle in there!) You brood of vipers! How can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned. (Matthew 12: 33 - 37) So, no higher authority than Jesus Christ himself condemns reckless rhetoric, and we who call ourselves Christians should not soft pedal this kind of behavior either. A man like Pat Robertson, who CLAIMS to be a Christian, should have read statements of this nature and taken them to heart long ago. When I complain about this kind of problem, I do so because it degrades the standing of the Christian faith in the eyes of nonbelievers who are watching. If I, a nobody, get upset when the name of God is blasphemed in this manner, shouldn't genuine Christian leaders roundly condemn the same behavior? After all, this is what the scriptures admonish: Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of wrongdoing, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us. (1 Peter 2: 12) And elsewhere: But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there WILL BE FALSE TEACHERS AMONG YOU. (Emphasis is mine.) They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed, these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up . . . (2 Peter 2: 1 - 3) The fact that Pat Robertson calls himself a Christian disgusts me for this very reason. He's not following the example of Jesus Christ, so by his actions, he denies Christ. If he's impulsive and can't control himself, he has no power from God. A person who calls himself a Christian is one who should know God very well. Therefore: We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, 'I know him', but does not do what he commands is a liar and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did. (1 John 2: 3 - 6) So then, if we examine what Jesus did, we will find a man who never sought harm for anyone else. He was a man who lived by high principle and spoke very carefully. He did not advocate violence, he did not stir up a mob to overthrow the Romans, he did not seek political power or financial gain. Therefore, if you see someone who claims to be a Christian doing these things, you can KNOW that he's a liar. Further on, you can read this: Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him. (1 John 3: 15) Now, I know that these faux Christians will say Those verses only apply to your Christian brother, because that's what they're programmed to say by the false teachers they follow. But the principles that Christians should follow transcend this worldly attitude. Once again, here's what Jesus actually taught: You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hakan Falk wrote: Robert, A question, In many countries death threat and instigation of murdering a person is against the criminal laws. Is it not the same in US and if, why have they not arrested and questioned Robertson? At the very least, such a threat would cross the threshold of assault, provided that Mr. Robertson had the means at his disposal to carry out his intention. Even though his followers are legion, he really LACKS the power to do anything more than influence his minions to send money, or vote a certain way. Therefore the question is this: Who will press charges under American law? Many of us over here consider Pat Robertson and other evangelists of his ilk little more than buffoons not worthy of serious consideration. (He could probably plead insanity to any such charge anyway and list a mountain of evidence in support of his claim.) In that light, it's simply not worth taxpayer money to bother. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.newadventure.ca Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Amen Robert! While not a christian, I've read many of the major scriptures of the world. While reading the Robertson thread, I was thinking how badly we needed to hear the Who would Jesus hate? Who would Jesus kill? message. Your message is so on target. The most important teaching we receive, not just from Jesus, but from almost all prophets is Deeds are greater than words. Love the least, as you love the great. Power demands responsibility. If we are to follow their teachings, we must not tend the church, we must tend our hearts and minds, and the whole world. All it takes to distinguish the truly good from the hypocrite, is to attend to their actions more than their words. How sad that so many of us are deceived by the transparent and self-serving lies of our political, spiritual, and commercial masters. We are slaves, the truth will set us free. Thank you, Taryn ornae.com On Aug 26, 2005, at 11:13 AM, robert luis rabello wrote: BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. When Jesus confronted the leaders of his day, he seldom had pleasant words for them for this very reason. Here is an example: Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. (There's a biofuel angle in there!) You brood of vipers! How can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned. (Matthew 12: 33 - 37) So, no higher authority than Jesus Christ himself condemns reckless rhetoric, and we who call ourselves Christians should not soft pedal this kind of behavior either. A man like Pat Robertson, who CLAIMS to be a Christian, should have read statements of this nature and taken them to heart long ago. When I complain about this kind of problem, I do so because it degrades the standing of the Christian faith in the eyes of nonbelievers who are watching. If I, a nobody, get upset when the name of God is blasphemed in this manner, shouldn't genuine Christian leaders roundly condemn the same behavior? After all, this is what the scriptures admonish: Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of wrongdoing, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us. (1 Peter 2: 12) And elsewhere: But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there WILL BE FALSE TEACHERS AMONG YOU. (Emphasis is mine.) They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed, these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up . . . (2 Peter 2: 1 - 3) The fact that Pat Robertson calls himself a Christian disgusts me for this very reason. He's not following the example of Jesus Christ, so by his actions, he denies Christ. If he's impulsive and can't control himself, he has no power from God. A person who calls himself a Christian is one who should know God very well. Therefore: We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, 'I know him', but does not do what he commands is a liar and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did. (1 John 2: 3 - 6) So then, if we examine what Jesus did, we will find a man who never sought harm for anyone else. He was a man who lived by high principle and spoke very carefully. He did not advocate violence, he did not stir up a mob to overthrow the Romans, he did not seek political power or financial gain. Therefore, if you see someone who claims to be a Christian doing these things, you can KNOW that he's a liar. Further on, you can read this: Anyone who hates
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Robertson will never be arrested Rummy says this is a free country and everyon has the right to free speeech and besides we have laws a ginst killing people . He failed to mention the thousands of dead American service men and Iraqui citizens and Robertson owns George Bush sometimes known as Satans Little Stooge - Original Message - From: Hakan Falk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Biofuel@sustainablelists.org Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 1:13 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers Robert, A question, In many countries death threat and instigation of murdering a person is against the criminal laws. Is it not the same in US and if, why have they not arrested and questioned Robertson? Hakan At 17:13 26/08/2005, you wrote: BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hakan Falk wrote: Robert, A question, In many countries death threat and instigation of murdering a person is against the criminal laws. Is it not the same in US and if, why have they not arrested and questioned Robertson? It's tempting to reply to the effect that he's a supporter of Bush and the neocon agenda, but that's irrelevent. I've read the quotes, and I've never liked Robertson. That said, he never made a threat agains Chavez. He never asked any of his followers to kill the man. He offered his unsolicited opinion that the CIA should assasinate him. Suggesting that a government agency should kill a foreign leader may be stupid, mean, immoral, and a number of other things, but it's not illegal to offer a mean, stupid, and immoral opinion. If he were funding an undercover operation to kill someone - anyone - then he could be arrested under any number of laws. But we're very short on evidence that's the case, and long on rhetoric about his hypocritic nature. I'm not trying to support the man, just trying to inject a little reason back into the discussion. --- David ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
David, So it is legal in US to suggest that a man should be assassinated? What if Chavez is murdered is murdered and CIA is behind it, will he not be pursued for suggesting it? I know that it is against US law to have any agency to kill a leader of an other Nation. This means also that Robertson is instigating a crime, by suggesting it. Why is he not in jail? Hakan At 19:41 26/08/2005, you wrote: Hakan Falk wrote: Robert, A question, In many countries death threat and instigation of murdering a person is against the criminal laws. Is it not the same in US and if, why have they not arrested and questioned Robertson? It's tempting to reply to the effect that he's a supporter of Bush and the neocon agenda, but that's irrelevent. I've read the quotes, and I've never liked Robertson. That said, he never made a threat agains Chavez. He never asked any of his followers to kill the man. He offered his unsolicited opinion that the CIA should assasinate him. Suggesting that a government agency should kill a foreign leader may be stupid, mean, immoral, and a number of other things, but it's not illegal to offer a mean, stupid, and immoral opinion. If he were funding an undercover operation to kill someone - anyone - then he could be arrested under any number of laws. But we're very short on evidence that's the case, and long on rhetoric about his hypocritic nature. I'm not trying to support the man, just trying to inject a little reason back into the discussion. --- David ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. In need of clarity, Clif TarynToo wrote: Amen Robert! While not a christian, I've read many of the major scriptures of the world. While reading the Robertson thread, I was thinking how badly we needed to hear the Who would Jesus hate? Who would Jesus kill? message. Your message is so on target. The most important teaching we receive, not just from Jesus, but from almost all prophets is Deeds are greater than words. Love the least, as you love the great. Power demands responsibility. If we are to follow their teachings, we must not tend the church, we must tend our hearts and minds, and the whole world. All it takes to distinguish the truly good from the hypocrite, is to attend to their actions more than their words. How sad that so many of us are deceived by the transparent and self-serving lies of our political, spiritual, and commercial masters. We are slaves, the truth will set us free. Thank you, Taryn ornae.com On Aug 26, 2005, at 11:13 AM, robert luis rabello wrote: BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. When Jesus confronted the leaders of his day, he seldom had pleasant words for them for this very reason. Here is an example: Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. (There's a biofuel angle in there!) You brood of vipers! How can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned. (Matthew 12: 33 - 37) So, no higher authority than Jesus Christ himself condemns reckless rhetoric, and we who call ourselves Christians should not soft pedal this kind of behavior either. A man like Pat Robertson, who CLAIMS to be a Christian, should have read statements of this nature and taken them to heart long ago. When I complain about this kind of problem, I do so because it degrades the standing of the Christian faith in the eyes of nonbelievers who are watching. If I, a nobody, get upset when the name of God is blasphemed in this manner, shouldn't genuine Christian leaders roundly condemn the same behavior? After all, this is what the scriptures admonish: Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of wrongdoing, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us. (1 Peter 2: 12) And elsewhere: But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there WILL BE FALSE TEACHERS AMONG YOU. (Emphasis is mine.) They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed, these teachers will exploit you with stories
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hakan Falk wrote: David, So it is legal in US to suggest that a man should be assassinated? I expect that's covered under free speech. I'd personally rate Robertsons comments as up there with any number of people who advocate the death of Bush for crimes against humanity or somesuch. If Bush were assasinated would these people really be responsible? It's legal in the US to hold an opinion that someone should be killed. It's legal to express that opinion. Bear in mind, of course, that IANAL. It crosses the line when it becomes inciting to violence or something clearer, like paying someone to perform the murder. What if Chavez is murdered is murdered and CIA is behind it, will he not be pursued for suggesting it? I don't believe so. The idea that the CIA would do something because this nut thought it was a good idea is laughable. Take a step back and listen to yourself. Does anyone on this list thing anyone at the CIA is going to wake up and say HEY! Robertson thinks we should assasinate a foreign head of state! Guess we'd better start laying plans C'mon, that's just silly. I know that it is against US law to have any agency to kill a leader of an other Nation. This means also that Robertson is instigating a crime, by suggesting it. Why is he not in jail? He's not instigating a crime. He's not causing a crime to be committed. He's not soliciting anyone to commit the crime. He's not offering money or other reward for the crime, he's not issuing a challenge to his followers that one of them should go kill the man. He's expressing a moronic, immoral opinion, not calling people to action. I'm not trying to support Robertson, just trying to defend free speech. You see if you want to be able to speak freely you have to let others do so too, even if you don't like what they say. And I'd suggest that people here think along those lines. If expressing the opinion that a criminal act would have a desirable outcome becomes a crime then free speech no longer exists. IE, if someone suggests that the world would be a better place without Bush are you calling for a crime to be committed and subject to arrest? In the US we call that dissent, and the government may be trying to extinguish it but they haven't yet succeeded. Lets not give them any ammo in their efforts. --- David ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Clif Caldwell wrote: Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? There's a lot of this kind of discussion in the archives. Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? Well, initially the news coverage seemed almost gleeful. The news, however, has been getting more and more grim. Perhaps the early flush of military success made some people believe that our mission in Iraq would be accomplished with little bloodshed. (Did anyone with a serious knowledge of our capability to project power ever believe we would have difficulty rolling over the Iraqi army? They made the most inept defense of a nation I can recall.) Now, however, we're dealing with the harsh reality of trying to unify a nation long held together by force. I, for one, never doubted we could defeat the Iraqi army. I, for one, never believed we could defeat the Iraqi people. Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Lies? Hmm . . . I'll let Todd handle that one. Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? I've found news coverage in the United States astonishingly pro war. For a long time, it seemed that very few voices were being raised in opposition, and those of us who DID speak out were being shouted down by a strong militarist sentiment that seemed pervasive in the United States. This is another topic we've discussed here many times. Having written this, please don't confuse my opposition to the war with opposition to individual soldiers. And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? You will find a very strong thread of sentiment among most people who post here that decries fundamentalism in any form. However, this is also an international list, and some of the discussion here has included an examination of WHY radical Islam has captured the imagination of so many people. Most of us Americans don't like to hear some of these things. Though I often find them hard to read, listening has opened my mind to a perspective that differs radically from my own. Now, if we were behaving as a truly Christian nation, the world would be a very different place, and I believe we would not be inciting the wrath of so many citizens in other countries. All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Indeed, as we all are. Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. Some of these issues may seem tangential at first. Close examination, however, will reveal how energy use, foreign policy, religious perspective, racism and many other isms blend to create the overall milieu in which the topic of biofuels exist. We who have been here for any length of time agree by consensus that which is deserving of discussion and that which is not. It's remarkably self regulating, for the most part. Do you disagree with anything I've posted concerning men of God and the scriptures? Do you not see the relationship between oil reserves in Venezuela and Mr. Robertson's political posturing? In this thread, we have the realms of religion and politics blending quite clearly with an underlying need to access the world's energy supplies; by force, if necessary. Deal with the energy use issue, and the compelling need to complain about Chavez will go away. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.newadventure.ca Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Clif Caldwell wrote: Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? I am a US citizen and I am outraged. I believe we need a massive demonstration mach on Washington DC to make our voices heard. Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? There are plenty of stories in The Washington Post and even in the NY Times that have documented some positives aspects. Unfortunately, the war has been a fiasco. The Bush administration had no plans as to what to do after the invasion, and in fact actively and anrgrily denounced any attempts to work out a post-conflict reconstruction plan prior to the invasion. They've brought this on themselves, us, and the citizens of Iraq. Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Which lies are you talking about? It's easy to rant - how about some specifics? Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? When the evening news rolls the names of those killed in combat in Iraq, respectfully, in silence, the response from the neocons is that they're focusing on the bad things. The Post has run three (just from memory) front page stories about local soldiers and their families and the services they receive. And I wonder how the Tillman family feels, if you want to talk about lies? You are upset because she is exercising her right to free speech? And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? Islam has its crackpots; Christianity has Pat Robertson. I don't defend either one. All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. In need of clarity, Clif TarynToo wrote: Amen Robert! While not a christian, I've read many of the major scriptures of the world. While reading the Robertson thread, I was thinking how badly we needed to hear the Who would Jesus hate? Who would Jesus kill? message. Your message is so on target. The most important teaching we receive, not just from Jesus, but from almost all prophets is Deeds are greater than words. Love the least, as you love the great. Power demands responsibility. If we are to follow their teachings, we must not tend the church, we must tend our hearts and minds, and the whole world. All it takes to distinguish the truly good from the hypocrite, is to attend to their actions more than their words. How sad that so many of us are deceived by the transparent and self-serving lies of our political, spiritual, and commercial masters. We are slaves, the truth will set us free. Thank you, Taryn ornae.com On Aug 26, 2005, at 11:13 AM, robert luis rabello wrote: BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. When Jesus confronted the leaders of his day, he seldom had pleasant words for them for this very reason. Here is an example: Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. (There's a biofuel angle in there!) You brood of vipers! How can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned. (Matthew 12: 33 - 37) So, no
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Speaking of outrage, I thought the Mission Accomplished news stunt was pretty outrageous. robert luis rabello wrote: Clif Caldwell wrote: Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? There's a lot of this kind of discussion in the archives. Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? Well, initially the news coverage seemed almost gleeful. The news, however, has been getting more and more grim. Perhaps the early flush of military success made some people believe that our mission in Iraq would be accomplished with little bloodshed. (Did anyone with a serious knowledge of our capability to project power ever believe we would have difficulty rolling over the Iraqi army? They made the most inept defense of a nation I can recall.) Now, however, we're dealing with the harsh reality of trying to unify a nation long held together by force. I, for one, never doubted we could defeat the Iraqi army. I, for one, never believed we could defeat the Iraqi people. Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Lies? Hmm . . . I'll let Todd handle that one. Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? I've found news coverage in the United States astonishingly pro war. For a long time, it seemed that very few voices were being raised in opposition, and those of us who DID speak out were being shouted down by a strong militarist sentiment that seemed pervasive in the United States. This is another topic we've discussed here many times. Having written this, please don't confuse my opposition to the war with opposition to individual soldiers. And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? You will find a very strong thread of sentiment among most people who post here that decries fundamentalism in any form. However, this is also an international list, and some of the discussion here has included an examination of WHY radical Islam has captured the imagination of so many people. Most of us Americans don't like to hear some of these things. Though I often find them hard to read, listening has opened my mind to a perspective that differs radically from my own. Now, if we were behaving as a truly Christian nation, the world would be a very different place, and I believe we would not be inciting the wrath of so many citizens in other countries. All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Indeed, as we all are. Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. Some of these issues may seem tangential at first. Close examination, however, will reveal how energy use, foreign policy, religious perspective, racism and many other isms blend to create the overall milieu in which the topic of biofuels exist. We who have been here for any length of time agree by consensus that which is deserving of discussion and that which is not. It's remarkably self regulating, for the most part. Do you disagree with anything I've posted concerning men of God and the scriptures? Do you not see the relationship between oil reserves in Venezuela and Mr. Robertson's political posturing? In this thread, we have the realms of religion and politics blending quite clearly with an underlying need to access the world's energy supplies; by force, if necessary. Deal with the energy use issue, and the compelling need to complain about Chavez will go away. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.newadventure.ca Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hello David Hakan Falk wrote: David, So it is legal in US to suggest that a man should be assassinated? I expect that's covered under free speech. I'd personally rate Robertsons comments as up there with any number of people who advocate the death of Bush for crimes against humanity or somesuch. If Bush were assasinated would these people really be responsible? Maybe I didn't notice but I have not heard of anyone calling for the death of Bush. Excepting some of the victims of course, but not anybody in the US, which I think is what you're talking about. It's legal in the US to hold an opinion that someone should be killed. It's legal to express that opinion. Bear in mind, of course, that IANAL. It crosses the line when it becomes inciting to violence or something clearer, like paying someone to perform the murder. What if Chavez is murdered is murdered and CIA is behind it, will he not be pursued for suggesting it? I don't believe so. The idea that the CIA would do something because this nut thought it was a good idea is laughable. Take a step back and listen to yourself. Does anyone on this list thing anyone at the CIA is going to wake up and say HEY! Robertson thinks we should assasinate a foreign head of state! Guess we'd better start laying plans C'mon, that's just silly. I'd be surprised if there weren't at least elements within the CIA who're thinking the same way as Robertson. I think the administration thinks the same way as Robertson. A lot of people think that. I think Chavez thinks that too. Have a look at this: http://www.mail-archive.com/cgi-bin/htsearch?method=andformat=shortc onfig=biofuel_sustainablelists_orgrestrict=exclude=words=chavez Search results for 'chavez' Or: http://snipurl.com/h8up ... Chavez( hey, they tried to oust him short of killing him)... They tried just about everything, and the stakes are getting higher and higher. If you think this sort of stuff doesn't happen, then it'd be you who's being silly, IMHO. http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg45962.html Re: [Biofuel] Confessions of an Economic Hit Man http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/41438/ An Interview with William Blum - The Granma Moses of Radical Writing http://members.aol.com/superogue/homepage.htm Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower, by William Blum http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, by William Blum http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm The American Holocaust ... just to scratch the surface. I know that it is against US law to have any agency to kill a leader of an other Nation. This means also that Robertson is instigating a crime, by suggesting it. Why is he not in jail? He's not instigating a crime. He's not causing a crime to be committed. He's not soliciting anyone to commit the crime. He's not offering money or other reward for the crime, he's not issuing a challenge to his followers that one of them should go kill the man. He's expressing a moronic, immoral opinion, not calling people to action. I'm not trying to support Robertson, just trying to defend free speech. You see if you want to be able to speak freely you have to let others do so too, even if you don't like what they say. There is no society that doesn't put restrictions on free speech, of necessity, and it's a very difficult line to draw. Inciting to violence is a case in point - it's obvious? Maybe, but it's a restriction of free speech just the same, and there are many others, along with a constantly shifting grey area. And I'd suggest that people here think along those lines. Nothing new to us David. But it's more than just a label, or maybe less. You're making a mistake in writing off much of this discussion as rhetoric, as you did. If you took a less blinkered look you'd see that a great deal of information has been provided, the list archives is now a good resource on Pat Robertson. Any future discussion here of Pat Robertson or of any similar event will be better informed from the start, as with many other subjects. And that's what's needed as a true basis for free speech - free information. The true enemy of free speech and all freedom is spin as much as fascism, IMHO, and Pat Robertson has provided us with yet another example of that too. Several. If expressing the opinion that a criminal act would have a desirable outcome becomes a crime then free speech no longer exists. IE, if someone suggests that the world would be a better place without Bush are you calling for a crime to be committed and subject to arrest? In the US we call that dissent, These days you (pl) call it treason as much as anything else. What's the punishment for treason in the US? and the government may be trying to extinguish it but they haven't yet succeeded. Lets not give them any ammo in their efforts. I don't think we give your
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
My my. And I was just thinking you might be a man who'd do a bit of checking before he shot his foot off. Again. I do rather wonder what you mean when you say right here in America when actually where you are right now is right here on the global Internet, on a global discussion group with a global membership that includes many Muslims living in Muslim countries, who are probably more aware than you are of calls from your country - calls and deeds done - to kill them and their leaders. But that doesn't count, does it? It does here. If you want outrage over the coverage of the war in Iraq you'll find it aplenty, but you won't like it - it's outrage at the unquestioning, knee-jerk coverage your so-called liberal press (ROFL!!!) gave to the pack of blatant lies that led unfailingly to everything and everybody getting torn to pieces in Iraq (as most of us predicted at the time), including your precious military, and every single promise broken. Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : What exactly do you mean by that? Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. It is not far away from renewable energy sources. I think you should read this carefully, since it looks as if you haven't already done so: http://sustainablelists.org/pipermail/biofuel_sustainablelists.org/200 5-May/07.html Or: http://snipurl.com/gi45 Best wishes Keith In need of clarity, Clif TarynToo wrote: Amen Robert! While not a christian, I've read many of the major scriptures of the world. While reading the Robertson thread, I was thinking how badly we needed to hear the Who would Jesus hate? Who would Jesus kill? message. Your message is so on target. The most important teaching we receive, not just from Jesus, but from almost all prophets is Deeds are greater than words. Love the least, as you love the great. Power demands responsibility. If we are to follow their teachings, we must not tend the church, we must tend our hearts and minds, and the whole world. All it takes to distinguish the truly good from the hypocrite, is to attend to their actions more than their words. How sad that so many of us are deceived by the transparent and self-serving lies of our political, spiritual, and commercial masters. We are slaves, the truth will set us free. Thank you, Taryn ornae.com On Aug 26, 2005, at 11:13 AM, robert luis rabello wrote: BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. When Jesus confronted the leaders of his day, he seldom had pleasant words for them for this very reason. Here is an example: Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit. (There's a biofuel angle in there!) You brood of vipers! How can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Fred Finch wrote: Clif, No flames from me just... snip Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? Coverage is adequate and the news is not very good. http://chrenkoff.blogspot.com/2005/07/good-news-from-iraq-part-31.html http://unix.dfn.org/good_news_iraq.shtml http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_030726.htm http://www.command-post.org/2_archives/019738.html http://tampatrib.com/opinion/MGBQKJP0MCE.html (A very thoughtful look at the reasons behind the current coverage.) Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? When there is no good news what is the use of making a fake report? Please see above. Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Lies or opinions? It seems that Pat roberston can have them but not Michael Moore? Cite Links to the lies and we'll talk... http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/ http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5335853/site/newsweek/ http://www.factcheck.org/article131.html http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/ Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? It seems that President Bush and Faux Nooze is giving them voice, but who is listening? Good point. But then again public opinion is usually shaped by what they are told in the most strident tone and by the most numerous and loudest voices. And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? Again, cite a link and we'll talk. For every link you bring, I will find 10 Muslim cleric statements denouncing those statements and the war and the 9/11 attacks. http://www.leaderu.com/focus/islamandjihad.html (I cannot speak or write as eloquently as this summary.) All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Yet you make it point to attempt to point out the blind spots of others. A suggestion perhaps, work on your own blind spots. IMO, Peace is not a blind spot. fred I agree. I was too harsh in my statements. I apologize for the tone of them. Please forgive me. It seems the log in my eye was blinding me and needs some attention before I work on the perceived speck in others. I too feel peace is a very good thing however perhaps we should be considering what kind of peace we are talking about. A fellow seeker of the truth, Clif Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. In need of clarity, Clif TarynToo wrote: Amen Robert! While not a christian, I've read many of the major scriptures of the world. While reading the Robertson thread, I was thinking how badly we needed to hear the Who would Jesus hate? Who would Jesus kill? message. Your message is so on target. The most important teaching we receive, not just from Jesus, but from almost all prophets is Deeds are greater than words. Love the least, as you love the great. Power demands responsibility. If we are to follow their teachings, we must not tend the church, we must tend our hearts and minds, and the whole world. All it takes to distinguish the truly good from the hypocrite, is to attend to their actions more than their words. How sad that so many of us are deceived by the transparent and self-serving lies of our political, spiritual, and commercial masters. We are slaves, the truth will set us free. Thank you, Taryn ornae.com On Aug 26, 2005, at 11:13 AM, robert luis rabello wrote: BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. When Jesus confronted the leaders of his day, he seldom had pleasant words for them for this very reason. Here is an example: Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Keith Addison wrote: My my. And I was just thinking you might be a man who'd do a bit of checking before he shot his foot off. Again. I do rather wonder what you mean when you say right here in America when actually where you are right now is right here on the global Internet, on a global discussion group with a global membership that includes many Muslims living in Muslim countries, who are probably more aware than you are of calls from your country - calls and deeds done - to kill them and their leaders. But that doesn't count, does it? It does here. If you want outrage over the coverage of the war in Iraq you'll find it aplenty, but you won't like it - it's outrage at the unquestioning, knee-jerk coverage your so-called liberal press (ROFL!!!) gave to the pack of blatant lies that led unfailingly to everything and everybody getting torn to pieces in Iraq (as most of us predicted at the time), including your precious military, and every single promise broken. Guilty as accused concerning not backing up my statements. I have remedied this in another post. And guilty as accused as writing from a decidingly US perspective. I have traveled extensively including performing tsunami relief (as a civilian paying my own way) in Banda Aceh, Indonesia (90+ % Isalmic). Please understand that I have cried with, struggled with and even prayed with Muslims and Christians all over the world. (I have carried out humanitarian efforts in Central and South America and Jordan also.) Unfortunately I was not as sensitive as I should have been to all the readers of this list. I am a former officer in the USAF so perhaps I do have a fondness for the fine, exceedingly capable and patriotic men and women serving to protect and defend a country I personally feel is a pretty good place to live. Perhaps I am living under some delusions and if that is the case then I'm sure someone will try to correct the errors of my ways. Thanks for the input. I will give it some thought. Just a guy sorting things out, Clif Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : What exactly do you mean by that? Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. It is not far away from renewable energy sources. I think you should read this carefully, since it looks as if you haven't already done so: http://sustainablelists.org/pipermail/biofuel_sustainablelists.org/200 5-May/07.html Or: http://snipurl.com/gi45 Best wishes Keith In need of clarity, Clif TarynToo wrote: Amen Robert! While not a christian, I've read many of the major scriptures of the world. While reading the Robertson thread, I was thinking how badly we needed to hear the Who would Jesus hate? Who would Jesus kill? message. Your message is so on target. The most important teaching we receive, not just from Jesus, but from almost all prophets is Deeds are greater than words. Love the least, as you love the great. Power demands responsibility. If we are to follow their teachings, we must not tend the church, we must tend our hearts and minds, and the whole world. All it takes to distinguish the truly good from the hypocrite, is to attend to their actions more than their words. How sad that so many of us are deceived by the transparent and self-serving lies of our political, spiritual, and commercial masters. We are slaves, the truth will set us free. Thank you, Taryn ornae.com On Aug 26, 2005, at 11:13 AM, robert luis rabello wrote: BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Clif, Do not worry, Guantanamo is full of people who only suggested a destruction of US, but never did something about it. You have a lot of people who supports you and think the same. Every day you will find it in US news media, not to mention US legislation and US government. At 21:48 26/08/2005, you wrote: Wow and to think that I was going to use this list only to figure out how to titrate WVO correctly. At the risk at attracting perhaps merited flames .. Where is the outrage at the coverage of the war in Iraq ? Every day in US media, Pentagon news briefing and White House news briefing. It is much more attention to the official spin, than the negative coverage about the war in Iraq. Is it not that you would prefer it censored and only the good news to be reported. Have you heard one positive story on NPR or anywhere else ? Excuse an ignorant foreigner, but what is NPR? Is it an internationally accepted shortening, or is it your secret? Where is the outrage at the fine work Michael Moore and numerous others are doing at peddling lies ? I read a lot of outrage towards Michael Moore, why do you not read it? Is it not that you would prefer it censored and only the bad news to be reported. Where is the outrage when fine mothers, sisters, sons and fathers who are proud of the service their sons and daughters are offering in the Armed Services are not given any voice and one heartbroken mother is given weeks of press coverage because she is against the war in Irag ? Why is there not a voice for the hundreds of thousands of fine Iraqis, who died by the hands of Americans and only committed the crime to be born in Iraq. It is far more press coverage for the couple of thousand Americans who died, that for the couple of hundreds of thousands Iraqis who died. If the press coverage is proportional, it would be 0.1% for the Americans and 99.9% for the Iraqis. Much of the press coverage that I see, suggest that the Americans have a divine right to kill Iraqis. And finally a point that may need some attention by the Men of God judicatory committee on this list : What God? You have to be specific, because it is many of them and it is difficult to know which one you mean. This list is very international and open minded, so if it is a mention committee, there must be several of them, each one representing a subset of members. Where is the outrage at allowing Muslim clerics right here in America to daily call for the UTTER destruction of not only Americans who believe that Allah may not be the way, but also any other infidels? As it is also many who call for the destruction of Muslims. But Chaves is is a good Catholic, so this is an exception from the normal in US. What has this to do with Chaves, who is a good catholic. All I'm saying is that I for one feel compelled to be very conscious of my own blind spots as I am chief among those who can stand only by grace . Oooops! Just a thought to further take this list into a land far away from renewable energy sources. Are you calling for more American participation? In need of clarity, Of what??? Clif TarynToo wrote: Amen Robert! While not a christian, I've read many of the major scriptures of the world. While reading the Robertson thread, I was thinking how badly we needed to hear the Who would Jesus hate? Who would Jesus kill? message. Your message is so on target. The most important teaching we receive, not just from Jesus, but from almost all prophets is Deeds are greater than words. Love the least, as you love the great. Power demands responsibility. If we are to follow their teachings, we must not tend the church, we must tend our hearts and minds, and the whole world. All it takes to distinguish the truly good from the hypocrite, is to attend to their actions more than their words. How sad that so many of us are deceived by the transparent and self-serving lies of our political, spiritual, and commercial masters. We are slaves, the truth will set us free. Thank you, Taryn ornae.com On Aug 26, 2005, at 11:13 AM, robert luis rabello wrote: BT wrote: Greetings fellow revolutionary alchemists! The question I have is, How do we help separate the good-hearted followers from their devious leaders? I've found the best thing to do is go back to the scriptures from whence Christians are supposed to derive standards for their behavior. This is especially true when the argument of you shouldn't judge anyone comes to fore. Now, Jesus himself said this, in the second part of Luke 12: 48: From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. Leaders, who ought to know better, are far more accountable than the average person. When Jesus confronted the leaders of his day, he seldom had pleasant words for them for this very reason. Here is an example: Make a tree good and its
Re: [Biofuel] Robertson et al VS. followers
Hakan Falk wrote: Excuse an ignorant foreigner, but what is NPR? Is it an internationally accepted shortening, or is it your secret? NPR stands for National Public Radio. It's a news service partially funded by the government through the non profit Corporation for Public Broadcasting, by listeners and by for profit corporations. It's where I get my news. robert luis rabello The Edge of Justice Adventure for Your Mind http://www.newadventure.ca Ranger Supercharger Project Page http://www.members.shaw.ca/rabello/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
