author: Miss Terri

subject: Origin and survival of a generosity meme

text:
"Z" <[email]> wrote in message news:arbb5i$rt9$[email]...

    So you claim, , Z; however, it would seem you err in various important
senses. Consider, if there is no Santa Claus, then who are parents
pretending to be when they sign that name in proxy on X-mas presents, or,
more publicly visible, who is being imitated by all those fund raisers
standing about on street corners dressed in Santa-Claus outfits or by actors
offering a seat on Santa's lap to kiddies in toy departments during the
holiday season? Strange how they all know just what to wear and exactly how
to make up, isn't it?

    No doubt you'll insist that the parents are merely enacting the spirit
of X-mas and those charity and department store workers costumed as Santa
are pretending to be a mythical character; however, might there not be a
historical Santa Claus as the real flesh and blood person behind this
archetype of the generosity meme? Hmm... Let's try a bit of research.

    Voila!  ( The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia Copyright ï¿½ 1994, 2000,
Columbia University Press.) "Nicholas, Saint, patron of children and
sailors, of Greece, Sicily, and Russia, and of many other places and
persons. Little is known of him, but he is traditionally identified as a
4th-century bishop of Myra in Asia Minor. His relics were stolen from Myra
in the Middle Ages and taken to Bari, Italy. St. Nicholas is the subject of
many legends. He is credited with restoring to life three boys who had been
chopped up and pickled in salt by a butcher. Another famous story concerns
his giving three bags of gold to the daughters of a poor man and thus saving
them from lives of prostitution. Later tradition transformed the bags into
three gold balls, which became the symbol of pawnbrokers. In the Netherlands
and elsewhere St. Nicholas's feast (Dec. 6) is a children's holiday,
appropriate for gifts. The English in colonial New York adopted from the
Dutch the now unrecognizable saint, calling him Santa Claus (a contraction
of the Dutch Sint Nikolaas). They moved his feast day to the English gift
holiday, Christmas. The career and qualities attributed to Santa Claus are
all recently acquired."
    And still in the 21st century the spirit of Saint Nicholas a.k.a. Santa
Claus lives on enacted today by millions world wide. Pay no heed to Z,
Virginia, he's but another futile Scrooge whistling vainly in the winter
winds who'll be extinct long before the Santa Claus meme disappears from
human culture.


author: Z

subject: Re: Origin and survival of a generosity meme

text:
Santa

Whether St. Nicholas existed or not is irrelevant - Millions of parents lie
to their children, and teach them to be weak conformist instead of
instilling the excitement and wonder of the real world.

Scrooge I am not. Generosity should not be built upon a lie, because when
the truth becomes clear their will be no more gifts.

Santa Claus's "meme" (a faddish buzzword if there ever was one) may out live
me, but my memes will certainly outlive you and yours Miss Teri.


subject: Let's stick to the facts, Z.

text:
"Z" <[email]> wrote in message news:arjk3g$j5t$[email]...

    It is relavant to those who prefer empicical facts to opinionated
speculation.

    According to John S. Wilkins "The fundamental theoretical concept of
memetics is the meme - the unit of cultural evolution and selection."
(Quoted from his paper What's in a Meme? Reflections from the perspective of
the history and philosophy of evolutionary biology. Journal of
Memetics -Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 2.
(http://jom-emit.cfpm.org/1998/vol2/wilkins_js.html)

    The well know philosopher of science, Daniel Dennett, also defines the
meme as the theoretical unit replicated during cultural transmission in "The
Evolution of Culture"
(http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/dennett/dennett_p2.html)

Merry X-mas, Z. Santa Claus loves you anyway. ;-)


author: meg

subject: Re: Ye Olde Tapeworms - Appreciate the following email...

text:
On Nov 3, 3:32 pm, "Pastor Frank" <[email]> wrote:

Pastor Frank, gee, it has been a long time since I've heard from you,
run out of choir boys?  Of course, we know, your not really a pastor,
don't we.    Besides that, you are so insecure with your own religion
(or lack there-of) that you have to come here to try to 'convert'
people just to feel better.   Well, almost PF.  But there is something
about people who worship ancient pedophiles that just kinda sticks in
my craw.   You see, it is a fact that 'Mary' was probably around 13
years old at the time of her rape.  That makes your hero a
pedophile.   Glory be to pedophiles...  amen


author: Pastor Frank

text:
"meg" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
    That's all non sequitur to what I wrote above. Are you at a loss of
something or someone to vilify? But we should be glad you believe the Bible
and the story of Mary, who was "overshadowed" by God to conceive Jesus. Are
you saying overshadowing is equal to sexual intercourse and rape?
    You seem to have a sexual fixation. Ask Jesus to deliver you from such
compulsions.


author: David V.

text:
Pastor Frank wrote:

It did get her pregnant. How is what your god did any different
than the rape of Europa?

It's your god that's fixated on sex.


author: yan

subject: 訓唔著...

text:
嚙磅嚙踝蕭Q嚙褐殷蕭...嚙緲嚙盤嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭X嚙篁嚙踝蕭, 嚙踝蕭嚙瞎嚙緻覺D嚙瞌嚙踝蕭b嚙踝蕭佷v嚙踝蕭
diffraction pattern..(嚙踝蕭嚙豌歹蕭嚙瘠physics嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭...), 嚙稽嚙瞇嚙瞌嚙踝蕭嚙璀嚙罵嚙踝蕭嚙趣有
嚙緣/嚙踝蕭/嚙緣/嚙踝蕭u...嚙踝蕭嚙豌可嚙踝蕭Y嚙諉荔蕭嚙踝蕭嚙誕射D嚙踝蕭...嚙踝蕭Y嚙碼嚙�...
(P.S. 嚙誹佗蕭嚙箠嚙碼靚迎蕭嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭嚙�, 睇嚙磊嚙碼嚙褕得嚙踝蕭scan嚙磕嚙諉伐蕭...)


subject: Re: 訓唔著...

text:
嚙踝蕭o嚙踝蕭...D嚙踝蕭O嚙踝蕭i嚙踝蕭diffraction!(嚙瑾嚙諉我個蛛蕭嚙踝蕭Ygrating, 嚙瘦嚙踝蕭D嚙踝蕭嚙�
coherence)

Fong Fu Yun wrote:


subject: Re: 訓唔著...

text:
嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭....嚙豎你讀PG嚙踝蕭s嚙踝蕭J嚙踝蕭! 嚙磅嚙諄迎蕭...嚙緘嚙瘦嚙璀嚙緯嚙踝蕭$$, 嚙諉踝蕭summer term
嚙踝蕭.(嚙踝蕭Y嚙璀嚙稽嚙踝蕭嚙箠嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭s...嚙磐嚙瑾嚙罷嚙踝蕭嚙瞇嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭顗滿u嚙踝蕭s嚙緞..睇嚙璀嚙緯嚙踝蕭n嚙練嚙踝蕭..)

嚙篁嚙篁嚙調殷蕭 wrote:


subject: Re: 訓唔著...

text:
嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭嚙誹看選蕭...嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭嚙瞌嚙誼影嚙諉是嚙踝蕭嚙瞌. 嚙璀嚙稽嚙箠嚙調賂蕭...
  嚙緯嚙窯嚙緯嚙窯嚙踝蕭嚙褐是嚙璀嚙賠歹蕭嚙踝蕭嚙瞑覺,嚙踝蕭嚙瞌嚙璀嚙豎到的嚙瘤嚙踝蕭......

"嚙踝蕭d" wrote:


subject: Re: 訓唔著...

text:
嚙誹會嚙踝蕭嚙瘤...嚙踝蕭嚙蝓你嚙瑾嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭嚙踝蕭嚙緙......嚙璀嚙踝蕭嚙磐.

"嚙踝蕭d" wrote:


author: Bob

subject: White Liberals Tell Black Lies About Civil Rights

text:
An interesting read.

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-02-13.html


author: wolfagain

subject: Re: White Liberals Tell Black Lies About Civil Rights

text:
On Feb 15, 7:13 am, "Tom Sr." <[email]> wrote:

Trying to educate Obama Lovers with actual FACTS is like Rachel Maddow
trying to "Turn On" Shaun Hannity by exposing her hairy legs while
wearing a "See Thru" blouse for a one night stand....FUTILE!!!!!


author: Ramon F. Herrera

text:
On Feb 15, 9:12 am, wolfagain <[email]> wrote:

Republicans (conservatives in general) have a VERY simplistic mind.
Everything is black and white to them. Their favorite movies are from
Disney (good guy, bad guy) and their hero is John Wayne. They focus on
looks and appearances: the polite and diplomatic act of bowing is
insulting to them.

Liberals have a much more complex mind. They focus in substance and
intellect. Ugly broads like Janet Reno, Napolitano or Golda Meier
would NEVER make it in the Republicans Party. Dumb bimbos (Palin,
Bachmann, O'Donnell) would never make it in the Democratic Party.

Just compare the women in Faux vs. CNN and -specially- MSNBC.

In the Conservative mind:

A good looking person  ==> a good person
A bad looking person   ==> a bad person.

That is why conservatives tend to be racists.

Q.E.D.

-Ramon F. Herrera


author: Tom Sr.

text:
On Feb 15, 10:12 am, wolfagain <[email]> wrote:

Thank you for publicly proving your willful-ignorance, again.

Have A Nice Day!   :D
.

-----
-----
Please Note:

In select newsgroups my post will be followed by an out-of-date, cut-
and-paste, SHRIEKING ranting and raving post by Bob Milby Jr., aka
Patriot Games, aka Buster Norris, aka 10,000s of Sockpuppets -- Winner
of The alt.usenet.kooks Awards:  Palmjob Paddle (July 2008)*, KO0k of
the Month (Sept. 2012)**, and the Order of the Holey Sockpuppet (Oct.
2012)!***

     * This award is given to the person who gets spanked (as in,
thrashed) the most in a given month by other posters or even himself.
     ** Given to someone whose Kookery is judged to have surpassed all
others.
     ***  For those most prolific in the art of, abiet thinly,
disguising their net.presence behind whatever nose and glasses they
can concoct.

We hope to return you to more rational posting after this brief,
psychotic interruption.
------
------


author: Kicking Ass and Taking Names

text:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 06:28:51 -0600, Bob <[email]> wrote:

Ann the Man does exactly what the rest of you rightwingnutjobs do: You
think history stopped in the mid-1960's.

Yes, it is true that the Democratic Party WAS the party of Jim Crow,
Strom Thrumond, and the KKK.

It is also true that LBJ was able to pass the Civil Rights Act and the
Voting Rights Act only with Republican support in the face of
oppostion from SOUTHERN Democrats.

HOWEVER -- WHAT IS ALSO TRUE -- and what Coulter and the rest of you
lyng sacks of dog shit forget to mention is this fact:  TODAY, and
since the days of Richard Nixon and his Southern Strategy, the GOP has
replaced the Democratic Party as the party of racism, hate, the KKK,
and Jim Crow. Or have you not noticed that the formerly solid Jim Crow
Democratic South is now the solid Jim Crow Republican South?

You don't want to be reminded that Ronald Reagan's first speech as the
GOP Republican presidential nominee was in Philiadelphia, Mississippi
-- the site of one of the most heinous kidnappings, torture, and
lynchings of the Civil Rights era -- where he pronounced that he was
pro-states' rights.  In Mississippi, "states' rights" is a code word
for "the feds will leave you alone so you can treat your n*****s any
way you want to."  And the racist, hate-filled, biblethumping Jim Crow
South flocked to the Republican Party.

Not that you will do so, but you need to read this:
http://www.alternet.org/story/147004/how_the_gop_became_the_white_man%27s_party

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

http://www.umich.edu/~lawrace/votetour10.htm

http://www.salon.com/2011/02/03/reagan_southern_strategy/


text:
On Feb 15, 7:59 am, Kicking Ass and Taking Names
<[email]> wrote:

Now, now, KAATN.  You know given facts to far-right KO0ks only hurts
their little brains and makes them clutch their toy elephants even
tighter!
.

-----
-----
Please Note:

In select newsgroups my post will be followed by an out-of-date, cut-
and-paste, SHRIEKING ranting and raving post by Bob Milby Jr., aka
Patriot Games, aka Buster Norris, aka 10,000s of Sockpuppets -- Winner
of The alt.usenet.kooks Awards:  Palmjob Paddle (July 2008)*, KO0k of
the Month (Sept. 2012)**, and the Order of the Holey Sockpuppet (Oct.
2012)!***

     * This award is given to the person who gets spanked (as in,
thrashed) the most in a given month by other posters or even himself.
     ** Given to someone whose Kookery is judged to have surpassed all
others.
     ***  For those most prolific in the art of, abiet thinly,
disguising their net.presence behind whatever nose and glasses they
can concoct.

We hope to return you to more rational posting after this brief,
psychotic interruption.
------
------


author: DoD

subject: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
The establishment media is seemingly obsessed with "grim milestones"
in the War on Terror, as the Associated Press reminds us this past
weekend. But in the next week those same establishment media outlets
will probably stand mute when yet another "grim milestone" is reached
- the10,000th attack by Islamic terrorists and militants since 9/11,
which is responsible for approximately 60,000 dead and 90,000 injured.

The chronicler of this bloody tally is Glen Reinsford, editor of
TheReligionofPeace.com, who began compiling and updating daily a
detailed list of reported incidents of violence and terrorism around
the world targeting non-Muslims and Muslims alike. Because of space
limitations he only posts the past two months worth of attacks on his
websites main page, though he has archived all of the incidents from
past years (2001-2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007). He also maintains a
banner graphic with the updated number of attacks, which people can
post on their own websites.

When asked what prompted him to begin such a labor-intensive
undertaking, Reinsford identifies the tepid response to Islamic
terrorism by otherwise outspoken Muslim groups, with one organization
particularly in mind:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations. After 9/11, I kept an eye
on them and was quite disgusted by their lack of moral perspective.
They complain about issues that affect Muslims which are quite
trivial, on average, compared to what is happening in the name of
their religion. They do occasionally denounce terror in a general,
somewhat ambiguous, sense but there is an obvious lack of passion.
Their real interest is themselves.

Reviewing the list of recent incidents, it is surprising how many
"smaller" attacks occur daily, which the establishment media pass with
only a casual mention. While high profile attacks, like the one last
week in Baghlan Province, Afghanistan that killed 75 and wounded at
least 100 (many of them school children), receive plenty of attention,
smaller incidents, such as the attack last week on a hotel in
Baramulla, India that killed one, rarely register with the Western
media.

Because Reinsford relies on the establishment media for his numbers,
the true number of attacks and their victims are underreported:

In my case, I use published media reports from reputable sources on
the Internet, such as the Associated Press. None of the information
comes from rumor or word of mouth. Every bit of it can be verified
through publicly-available sources. If anything, I undercount the
attacks.

In his explanation of his methodology, he notes that he doesn't
include combat-related statistics, and acknowledges that the death
toll may increase in the days and months following the attack as
victims die from their injuries, which almost never get reported. The
list also doesn't account for the genocide in Darfur committed by the
Islamist government in Sudan and their Janjaweed marauding militias,
which the UN estimated last year had resulted in 400,000 dead and 2
million displaced.

With such seemingly incomprehensible carnage, I ask Reinsford if there
were any particular incidents that stand out, and he identified three
(qualifying that he could easily identify 15 more):

Nadimarg, India (3/23/03), dozens of Hindu villagers roused out of
their beds and machine-gunned by Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) Islamists.

Beslan, Russia (9/3/04), some 350 people slaughtered by Islamic
militants - half of them children.

Malatya, Turkey (4/18/07), three Christian Bible distributors are tied
up, tortured for hours then gruesomely murdered by men who acted
explicitly in the name of Islam.

For me, a September 2006 Washington Post article stands out concerning
an attack targeting Shi'ite women and children stands out, when a
Sunni suicide bomber detonated a kerosene fuel bomb filled with ball
bearings (for added effect) ripped through a crowd waiting in line to
buy fuel. The Post described the horrific scene:

The horrific blast sent women engulfed in flames screaming through the
streets. Two preteen girls embraced each other as they burned to
death, witnesses said. Later, wailing mourners thronged the scene of
the blast, which was strewn with the shoes of victims and a woman's
bloodied cloak, and voiced doubt that the reprisal violence would ever
end.

While many Muslim organizations in the West expend considerable effort
portraying themselves as victims of Western "Islamophobia", very
little is said by those groups about the fact that many of the
countless victims of Islamic terrorism are Muslims themselves. There
are certainly no public protests by organizations like CAIR in
recognition of those Muslims murdered and maimed by Muslims, though
they are quick to cite the number of civilians accidentally killed by
US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan (though Reinsford notes that while
225 Iraqis were killed in collateral damage incidents in 2006, there
were 16,791 Iraqi civilians killed by Islamic terrorists that same
year).

Reinsford says that the skewed perspective of ignoring the toll
Islamic terrorism takes on Muslims stems from a failure by Muslim
leaders to recognize the glaring problems that are resident in the
heart of their own community:

Yes, most of the victims of Islamic terror are Muslim, yet there is
very little outrage on the part of the Islamic world to terror,
relative to, say, a Muhammad cartoon or an "insult to Islam" by a
public figure. What does this tell us about the priorities of Islam?
In fact, sympathies for terrorists run much higher than many people
realize. Even those that do truly disagree with violence (and there
are many) somehow avoid taking any sort of responsibility for ending
it by convincing themselves that it has nothing to do with Islam.
Obviously it has everything to do with Islam, and the unwillingness on
the part of Muslims in the West to provide moral leadership against
Islamic extremism will ensure that the terror continues for a long
time.

With some of the biggest figures in the Islamic religious
establishment preaching jihad beamed around the globe on Islamic
satellite networks, and countless websites offering jihadist tracts,
YouTube hosting a veritable smorgasbord of videos documenting
terrorist incidents, and Internet forums dedicated to networking would-
be jihadists and encouraging violence, it might be that Islamic
extremists are a minority, but they clearly have dominated the
conversation. And it is doubtful that the situation will change as
long as that remains the case.

Fortunately, there are some Islamic leaders willing to speak out
consistently and forcefully against Islamic extremism and the non-stop
acts of terrorism, but the establishment media rarely gives them
notice, let alone a hearing, preferring instead the cacophony of CAIR
and those extremists who offer weak condemnations of terrorism, yet
defending its justification and denying its true causes.

Meanwhile, the deadly toll continues to roll unnoticed by the
establishment media. But Glen Reinsford is still there continuing his
grim task keeping us all aware of how pervasive and unrelenting the
problem of Islamic terrorism really is.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=453D47F2-EA57-43CD-8DF8-403A77F960BB


author: HHW

subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
On Nov 15, 10:36 pm, "DoD" <[email]> wrote:

Fool. Germany did one better about a week after Pearl Harbor. She
declared war on us.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
On Nov 15, 11:23 pm, "DoD" <[email]> wrote:

How can you agree when you didn't know what you're talking about in
the first place.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
On Nov 15, 11:25 pm, "B'enjamin C'ramer" <[email]>
wrote:

That's for sure, there's no war on terror. My OED failed, however, on
the last word.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
On Nov 16, 3:01 pm, HHW <[email]> wrote:

Dummy....


author: B'enjamin C'ramer

subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"DoD" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

There is no war on terror, dopeydaveyyugiewoggieyiddiedickielickiedumbkunt.


author: ElParedon

subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"DoD" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

YOU HAVEN'T PROVED THAT THE FIRST ATTACK WAS CARRIED OUT BY MUSLIMS, CROAT!

MAYBE IF YOU CRAWL IN SOME JEW'S ARSE A LITTLE DEEPER YOU MIGHT LEARN TO LIE
BETTER


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
On Nov 15, 12:33 pm, "ElParedon" <[email]> wrote:

I wonder why you hate Muslims so much?


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"HHW" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

The dummy chump can't follow a simple conversation.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"DoD" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

Did you wish to contribute something dopeydavey, or did you simply wish to
air your new sig line?


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"DoD" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

I HATE ONLY LIARS, ARSEHOLE!


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"ElParedon" <[email]> wrote in message
news:uf8%i.648$[email]...

If I were a Muslim, I would be downright pissed that a lying idiot like you
try to defend my religion. Islam has enough problems without having a
complete waste like you tarnish their image even more.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"DoD" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

If Islam has so many problems, why you scum just do not let it be. Iraq did
not invade America, remember!


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"DoD" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

Hahahahahahahahah. That's exactly what the real yids feel about you,
dopeydaveyyugiewoggieyiddiedickielickiedumbkunt.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"ElParedon" <[email]> wrote in message
news:yZ8%i.670$[email]...

It does as the subject of this thread shows. Again... I would be pissed if
you tried to represent my interests. You make Islam seem like a religion
perfect for  schizophrenic, Jew hating, irresponsible, lying, conspiracy
theorist, woman bashing, one note, can't deal with the issues type of
people. And that is what anyone from middle America reading your posts come
away thinking. You think I hate Islam? You damage Islam, (as far as people
reading usenet is concerned) 100k times more than me. And that is a fact.

 Iraq did

Germany didn't attack us in WW2 either.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"DoD" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
 How would you know Ustasha?


author: Defendario

subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
DoD wrote:

The Third Reich not only declared war on the US first, but proceeded to
attack the US merchant fleet viciously, sinking scores of ships, many
within sight of land.

In many ways the U-Boat scourge of 1942 was worse than Pearl Harbor.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"DoD" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

The yids are pissed at your attempts to represent their interests,
dopeydaveyyugiewoggieyiddiedickielickiedumbkunt.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"ElParedon" <[email]> wrote in message
news:fWq%i.463$[email]...

History books.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"Defendario" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

Ummmm, the U.S. declared war on Japan on Dec. 8 *1941* and Germany around a
few days later....

But one thing that about the U-boat attacks, they were pretty nervy
attacking as close to the U.S. as they did.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
DoD wrote:

Germany declared war on the US before we declared war on them.

Don't believe me?  Look it up, doodoo.

The US Navy was caught completely unprepared.  It was a worse scandal
than Pearl Harbor, and very damaging to US interests.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"Defendario" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

So what? The U-boat deal happened *after* the U.S. declared war on Germany,
in the summer of 42... I didn't criticize you for making the mistake. Get
over yourself already.

I agree. But it has nothing to do with what you were saying. We were already
at war with Germany.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"Defendario" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

I thought Germany did it earlier... but here is what hte Beeb says...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/11/newsid_3532000/3532401.stm

Wiki says the U.S. declared war on Germany the same day...


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
already
who is "we" arsehole? Croatia was a part of the Axis. Croats fought at
Stalingrad on the side of the Nazis


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
DoD wrote:

Damn, if you don't backpeddle mighty fast!
:-D

Right.  Hitler declared war on the US first, and followed thru with a
savage offensive.  So much for your little theory about how Germany
didn't attack us, doodoo.

;D


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"DoD" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

Wiki is a yid "resource" dopeydaveydumbkunt, and not to be believed. We've
tried to make you aware of that for yonks.


author: Herman Rubin

subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
In article <[email]>,
DoD <[email]> wrote:

It was the same day, but Germany did it first.  Congress
was in session, and under the circumstances, could and did
respond to a declaration of war by Germany with its own
declaration the same day.

I believe that Germany is in a time zone 6 hours ahead of
Washington, DC.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"ElParedon" <[email]> wrote in message
news:zYq%i.464$[email]...

Anybody besides you and your fellow band of Jew-haters.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
"Defendario" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

I just proved you wrong... Where did I back peddle?

Germany declaring war on the U.S.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/11/newsid_3532000/3532401.stm

U.S. declaring war on Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States

I can see you are being obtuse and wanting to play, so you can play with
yourself.

You don't want to have a meaningful dialogue, that is your problem.


subject: Re: A Grim Milestone Ignored

text:
DoD wrote:

Hardly.  Wiki doesn't constitute proof.  I've read many history books in
my years, doodoo.  They all said Hitler declared war first, as he was
obligated to do following the US declaration of war against Japan.

Check your copy of _Rise_and_Fall_of_the_Third_Reich_ author William
Shirer for details.

It's a book, doodoo.  You know, those things your chewed the covers off of.
:-)

Right.

Pftt

No, doodoo.  You are.

I redirect you to this quote:

Which is complete nonsense.  Hitler's subs had been killing US mariners
at sea for years, beginning with unrestricted U-Boat warfare in 1939.


author: [redacted]

subject: Re: Hey morons!!

text:
Den lördagen den 23:e mars 2013 kl. 04:18:00 UTC+1 skrev Scout:

Den lördagen den 23:e mars 2013 kl. 04:18:00 UTC+1 skrev Scout:

It's just a matter of analyzing cause and result, you gun loons are always claiming that guns are just tools, you claim guns don't kill people but people do.

Well, when it comes to kill people guns are more effective tools than knives and baseball bats, guns kills at a distance, knives don't, don't bring a knife to a gunfight.

In Sweden you are able to get a handgun license, but only if you are a member of a rifle club, and you are forced to keep the gun at the club.
Handguns kept at home are at risk to be stolen.

Tell me, you are now arming teachers and school janitors with guns, subsequently the next time the aggressors will bring heavier arms, e.g. ATVs or hand grenades, what are you going to respond with? Tanks? Howitzers?

Since you don't realize the progress, you are doomed.

Why are you loons so eager to own guns? Because of the fiftyeleventh amendment bullshit?
If your government starts to be oppressive you can't defend yourselves against them with handguns and rifles, since they got aircrafts, tanks, heavy artillery, subs, nukes etc.

Don't bring a handgun to a howitzer fight.


author: Scout

subject: Re: Hey morons!!

text:
<[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

Then why can't you produce such an analysis?

Where is your proof of cause and effect or, as you state it, result.

Guns are tools, and as inanimate tools incapable of acting on their own to
kill anyone. It is the user that determines the use to which the tool will
be put, good, bad or indifferent.

Never heard of a ballistic knife?

Is your complaint simply that they can kill at a distance?

Further accepting for the moment your claim that guns are more effective
tools than knives and baseball bats, then it also follows they are more
effective tools when used in self defense. So when you try to ban
guns....who are you more likely to force to accept a less effective tool?
The law abiding victim, or the law breaking violent criminal?

Sure, and they have a smuggling problem. Looks like the criminals don't care
that their actions are illegal.

http://www.thelocal.se/33984/20110525/#

What I still don't see is proof of the causality you claimed existed.

So, you think we should keep the teachers unarmed so that when someone does
come bent on killing they won't have to face any serious opposition?

I suppose your advice to women is not to fight back and to try and enjoy
their rape?

I understand being helpless does nothing to stop bad things from happening,
and being able and prepared to defend yourself does.

Because they have a lot of uses and serve a lot of needs and wants.

It's called freedom, something you don't have much experience with.

That certainly applies.

Odd then we're having trouble controlling people who have arms and refuse to
give up.

Do you think I should bring a knife instead?


author: Klaus Schadenfreude

subject: Re: Hey morons!!

text:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:33:41 -0700 (PDT), [email]
wrote:

Sure glad I don't live in Sweden. Looks like things haven't changed
much for you since you were slaves of the Danes, huh?

Bringing new meaning to the phrase, "Dumb Swede."


author: OM SHIVA!108

subject:
Clashes between protesters and security forces in Tibet's main city
	of Lhasa have left at least two people dead, according to reports.(BBC)

text:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7296837.stm

quote:

"British journalist James Miles, in Lhasa, told the BBC that rioters
had taken control of the city centre.

"Some of them are still attacking Chinese properties - shops,
restaurants, owned by ethnic Chinese," he said.  "Some of them are
looting those shops, taking out the contents and throwing them on huge
fires which they've lit in the street.""

Best use for that cheap plastic chinese made rubbish - god knows
theres enough of that crappy stuff here also!


subject:
Re: Clashes between protesters and security forces in Tibet's main
	city of Lhasa have left at least two people dead, according to reports.(BBC)

text:
On Mar 14, 5:26 pm, "OM SHIVA!108" <[email]> wrote:

latest


author: lechergod

text:
really idiot !!!! who fuck cares ???? go fuck your dalai and shut fuck
up !!!! you are wasting ng resources with shit posts !!!!

On Mar 14, 7:25 pm, "OM SHIVA!108" <[email]> wrote:


author: Gee

text:
Finally those western Christian fooled those Buddhist Monks to commit
big sin. Dailai will not go to heaven. Should he continue to use
religion to play politic? This is a big shame for Buddhism in the
world.


text:
On Mar 14, 1:22 pm, Gee <[email]> wrote:

As usual, dum-dum blames others for everything that goes wrong and
never, ever bothers looking inward. That's he will always be a dum-
dum.


author: Joe Bruno

subject: How Mohammed Combined Judaism and Christianity and Invented Islam


author: Warhol

subject: Re: How Mohammed Combined Judaism and Christianity and Invented Islam

text:
On Nov 28, 11:56 pm, kami <[email]> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRfc_Y_AsLo


author: kami

text:
On Nov 26, 6:23 pm, Warhol <[email]> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzykNHgljM0


text:
On Nov 28, 4:40 pm, kami <[email]> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4F2AjR5Zps


author: dsharavi

text:
On Nov 24, 8:36 am, Joe Bruno <[email]> wrote:

Actually, Mo combined only the simplest fables from Judaism and
Christianity, with pagan Arabic religions, to produce a extremely
watered down version of the first two.


text:
On Nov 25, 9:51 pm, Tim Howard <[email]> wrote:

Easily: he leaves all that to men.

Neither does the evil sadistic god, apparently, if it believes in
anything.


text:
On Nov 28, 12:49 pm, Warhol <[email]> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urGwWDlDF1Y


author: arah

text:
How many of us can't differentiate a religion from their followers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZfpgKCHkOs

On Nov 24, 9:39 pm, Michael Ejercito <[email]> wrote:


text:
On Nov 26, 5:15 am, Warhol <[email]> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmMsxqWYK-g&feature=related


text:
On Nov 26, 5:15 pm, kami <[email]> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0hGErPSfw0


author: Tim Howard

text:
On 11/24/2011 8:36 AM, Joe Bruno wrote:

Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are all bad.  The day people stop
believing in any of those religions will be a great day for humanity.


author: Michael Ejercito

text:
On Nov 24, 7:36 pm, Tim Howard <[email]> wrote:
   The day God judges humanity and casts His enemies into the
everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels will be the
greatest day ever.

 Michael


author: Kickboxer ®™

text:
When you say "bad" you must mean "anti-social" for forcing BELIEFS
into people's minds and dividing people. Right?


text:
On Nov 25, 6:39 am, Michael Ejercito <[email]> wrote:

That will be the great day of deliverance...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ8W18B6od0


text:
On Nov 25, 4:29 am, Warhol <[email]> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uzae_SqbmDE


text:
On Nov 25, 11:42 am, kami <[email]> wrote:

Set Fire To The Rain...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri7-vnrJD3k


text:
On Nov 25, 6:58 am, Warhol <[email]> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3QrxK3WPwQ


text:
On Nov 25, 8:05 pm, kami <[email]> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPUzxMnmhkQ


text:
On Nov 26, 6:51 am, Tim Howard <[email]> wrote:

there ain't one religeon that follows the laws of heaven... human race
has fallen really low...

and those who call themself leaders of faith serve their master the
devil. the simple truth is man turned his back on the true LORD, and
all will regret this when GODS anger will be released.

wake up and open your eyes on truth... We all live under a terrible
curse.


text:
On 11/24/2011 9:39 PM, Michael Ejercito wrote:

If you truly believe that then I have to ask why you would want to?  How
can you believe in such an evil sadistic god that would do such a thing.
  No one deserves such a fate.  Humane people do not believe in torture;
if they believe in executing others, they at least don't believe in
cruel and unusual punishment.


author: Yu

subject: Re: Asiaweek article on

text:
In article <8sifdu$bel$[email]>,
  [email] wrote:
Lama
China

Ok I will delete nothing on this post.

the

Karmapa is unknown in India? (Now I know why you said what you said)
He is a very hot potatoe. You try and understand this first then you
will know why Urgyen Trinley is now like a bird in a cage.

of

That is completely misleading.
By your defination the current Dalai Lama too is a Chinese Dalai Lama
because he is recognized by Beijing before he started working for CIA.

that

The Tibet activist version of "fear of China" refer to India's
unwillingness to antagonize China. They always love to portray
themselves a victims of something.

The Tibet Activists have tried to sqeeze every drop of propaganda juice
out of the run away boy "Escape to freedom" made great headlines only
that the reality didnot fit.

The Dalai Lama had wanted to control the Karma Kagyu sect even resorted
to assassination.
excepts:

..bitter memories of the 1960s, when the Dalai's brother Gyalo
Thondup# tried to bring all Tibetan sects under Geluk control - by force
if necessary. When 14 exile settlements united to fight his plan, unrest
erupted within the community. In March 1977, settlements leader
Gungthang Tsultrim was shot several times at point-blank range. The
murderer said he received 300,000 rupees from the Tibetan
government-in-exile. He claimed it offered to pay him even more to kill
the 16th Karmapa Lama.

#Gyalo Thondup worked for the CIA.
He was based in Darjeeling and was the main person responsible for
recruiting terrorists to serve the CIA in Tibet.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


subject: Re: Asiaweek article on

text:
In article <8sj4kl$svr$[email]>,
  Yu <[email]> wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/magazine/2000/1020/is.tibet.html
makes
Nonetheless

OK, he's not unknown, but he hasn't toured India, met and been
photographed with Prime Ministers. The Indian people haven't gotten to
know him and, I think, like him as they have HHDL.

There are two Karmapa's. One has been recognized by Beijing and until
recently lived in the PRC. Hense he was called "the Chinese Karmapa."

This is getting convoluted. I'll just say I suspect you are right that
the dispute between the two Karmapas including fighting between monks
probably also plays a part in India's reluctance to let the Karmapa go
to Sikkim or elsewhere. But I think the desire to not anger Beijing (if
not "fear of China") also plays a part.

on
not
juice
resorted
force
unrest
kill

Were did this come from Yuguang? Not Xinhua by any chance?

Have a nice day :)
Bud Swanson

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


subject: Re: Asiaweek article on

text:
In article <8sj621$u12$[email]>,
  [email] wrote:
western
world.
HHDL's
from

You don't understand societies where people believe in re-incarnation.
The 16th Karmapa had lots of followers in India, Nepal, Sikkim and
Bhutan. The 17th Karmapa is the continuation from the 16th, but who is
the 17th.??

You can find such information all over the web.
Don't know if you like this one.
If you object to my using "terrorists" please use "freedom fighters".
That is the politically correct term for CIA death squads.

http://www.umsl.edu/~skthoma/dalai.htm

Gyalo Thondup, the Dalai Lama's second-eldest brother, based in
Darjeeling, established an intelligence gathering operation with the CIA
in 1951. Six years later, he upgraded it to an advanced
CIA-trained guerrilla unit whose members were introduced to commando
techniques on Guam for example, and then parachuted back into Tibet
(Avedon 1984).

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


subject: Re: Asiaweek article on

text:
In article <8sj7or$vbo$[email]>,
  Yu <[email]> wrote:
Dalai
and
by
said)
you
to

Buddhists are in short supply in India (something like 1% of the
population I think), which is the country holding the "Chinese
Karmapa," not Nepal or Bhutan. Sikkim is part of India but only .05% of
the population....Which is why I think the general public of India not
being aquainted with the 17th Karmapa, as they are with the Dalai Lama,
accounts in large part for the Dalai Lama being free and the Karmapa
under quasi-house arrest.

CIA

What happened to the rest of the post Yuguang?

Everybody knows about Gyalo Thondup and the CIA. What we didn't know
about (and still don't) is how...

force
unrest
kill

So where did you hear this? We're dying to know :-)

Bud

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


author: Henrik Clausen

subject: AsiaWeek on the Karmapa issue

text:
Hi

   Latest I've heard is that Situpa supporters are buying and burning every
issue they can get their hands on :)

   Never mind the rumours, did anyone here get a copy of the actual
magazine? It's not on sale in Denmark - I'd be interested in obtaining one.

   Best wishes

        -Henrik


subject: Re: Asiaweek article on

text:
In article <8ssutd$mjt$[email]>,
  [email] wrote:
<eTcG5.1268$[email]>,

http://www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/magazine/2000/1020/is.tibet.html

of
Lama,

You are wrong Bud.
1) The Indians are very interested in Buddhism because the Hinduism and
the Buddhism overlap in many areas.
2) Buddhism is important in politically sensitive areas e.g. Sikkim,
Bhutan and Nepal.
3) Buddhism originated from India.
4) I read that Buddhism is gaining more followers in India because it
offer an escape from the cast system.

It's here.
http://www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/magazine/2000/1020/is.tibet.html

You still can't find it!!?
Want me to offer my prayer? :))

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


subject: SECTARIAN KILLING & DALAI LAMA (Asiaweek article on)

text:
In article <8ssutd$mjt$[email]>,
  [email] wrote:
<eTcG5.1268$[email]>,
http://www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/magazine/2000/1020/is.tibet.html

SECTARIAN KILLING & DALAI LAMA

Introduction
Many people have the misconception that the Tibetans have a homogeneous
society led by the Dalai Lama.
The Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama belong to the Gelup (Geluk) order
which is the dominant order in Tibet, but other
orders continued to have large number of followers. These are the
Nyingmapa, Kagyupa, and Sakyapa. These various order have their own
interests and often are suspicious of others.

The historical background and motives.
(A)
For many years, there have been different factions among the Tibetans
living abroad which the "government-in-exile" has not
been able to unify.
For example, the "Tibetan happy cause society," set up in the 1960s and
mainly composed of senior monks of the Gagyu,
Nyingma and Sagya sects and the Bon religion and headmen from Amdo and
Kamba prefectures, has control over 13 Tibetan
inhabited areas in India (which was thus called the 13 Groups) with tens
of thousands of people. They opposed unifying Tibetan
inhabited areas such as Amdo and Kamba with Tibet and putting Gagyu,
Nyingma, Sayga and the Bon under control of the
Gelug Sect. They ran enterprises and schools themselves, showed no
subordination to the 14th Dalai Lamaï¿½s
"government-in-exile," turned over no "independence tax" to it and
refused to take part in parades and demonstrations for
"Tibetan independence." The "government-in-exile" could not force it to
submit.

(B)
Declassified US State Department documents (December 17, 1965) mentioned
of  developing " a dynamic political program  to
weld the refugee communities into a cohesive whole under the leadership
of the Dalai Lama and his brother, Gyalo Thondup"

The Executions
Some examples
a)
Long-uneasy relations between the Geluk and Karma Kagyu sects were
further strained by the Dalai Lamaï¿½s intervention in the
recognition of the Karmapa Lama. It revived bitter memories of the
1960s, when the Dalaiï¿½s brother Gyalo Thondup tried to
bring all Tibetan sects under Geluk control by force if necessary. When
14 exile settlements united to fight his plan, unrest
erupted within the community. In March 1977, settlements leader
Gungthang Tsultrim was shot several times at point-blank
range. The murderer said he received 300,000 rupees from the Tibetan
government-in-exile. He claimed it offered to pay him
even more to kill the 16th Karmapa Lama.
(http://www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/magazine/2000/1020/is.tibet.html)

b)
In 1974 there was a plot to assassinate the King of Bhutan. The Royal
family is convinced that the Dalai Lama's followers were
behind the plot to grab power from the Kagyupa order which is the
dominant sect in Bhutan.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


subject: Re: Asiaweek article on

text:
In article <8t2jeq$u8k$[email]>,
  Yu <[email]> wrote:
not
and

Hey, they all look the same to you atheists :-). I think the interest
of Hindus is something like Christian Protestant interest in the Roman
Catholic Pope. A little curiosity, but not much. They consider him a
different religion.

So what is Nepal going to do? Invade the PRC? If Nepal gives India any
trouble, India just cuts off the border. That's what they did when I
was there. Nepal is at India's mercy.
And Bhutan! Bhutan is poor as hell, isolated as any country on earth,
and not part of India. I don't know if Bhutan even has a border
crossing with PRC.
Sikkim may be sensative but it's pretty minor in the rhelm of Indian
politics. Compare it to the fight over Kashmir and tension with
Pakistan.

I heard that too a long time ago. But still the number of Buddhists in
India is next to 1%.

Meditate for me Yu. There's nothing at that site but the same story
about the Karmapa.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


subject: Re: SECTARIAN KILLING & DALAI LAMA (Asiaweek article on)

text:
In article <8t0cpl$4us$[email]>,
  Yu <[email]> wrote:
homogeneous
and
tens
to

Any link to this group or this story?

mentioned
leadership
When

Once again there is nothing about this murder for hire story at the cnn
link you give.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


author: Ole

subject: Human right violations: was Re: SECTARIAN...

text:
"Yu" <[email]> wrote

 received 300,000 rupees from the Tibetan
(http://www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/magazine/2000/1020/is.t
ibet.html)

Whether the things mentioned here are proved facts or just
other gossip or slander is still an open question to me.
However it shows, that there are many more questionable
issues in the backyard of Tibetan society, including the
Dalai Lama's exiled government...

But the fascistic resolution of the 1998 United Cholsum
Organizaton's convention is not hearsay, it is a fact. It is
a fact that the points of this resolution are carried by the
majority of Tibetans. And it is a fact that they put the
resolution into action.

For instance, they passed the following paragraph:

"To make it impossible [...] to get access to foreign
travels. [...]"

Since a couple of years, in order to receive travel
documents, Tibetan monks have to sign a paper where they
have to confirm on not being a Shugden-adherent. Otherwise
they do not get the necessary documents from the Tibetan
Exile government.

Imagine that you would have to do something like this in the
US or in a European country...

---
check out: http://www.tibet-internal.com


text:
In article <8t0cpl$4us$[email]>,
  Yu <[email]> wrote:
homogeneous
and
tens
to
mentioned
leadership

It was this desire to build an unchallenged leadership with the Dalai
Lama and his brother at the helm that prompted the "Tibet Gov.
in Exile" to resort to violent intimidation and even assassinations of
leaders of the other Tibetan Buddhist sects.

When

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


subject: Re: Asiaweek article on

text:
In article <8t5i0f$bgi$[email]>,
  [email] wrote:

Now I understand you better.
All this while you participate in a thread without even bothering to
read the whole article. It is not even a long article.
Shame on you. Stop wasting people's time.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


author: ColoNel Polyps

subject: Drug Dealer Named Buster

text:
There is a drug dealer named Buster who operates from Miami to Texas to
Arkansas. He poses as a gang member and he may be a narc. He drugged me
and interogated me in Pasadena. He is a spic and is the type of scum
sucking maggot I would love to legally kill during a civil war.
Watch out for fat spics who sell drugs and say they belong to a gang.

Exterminate the christian government


author: You Know Who

subject: Re: Drug Dealer Named Buster

text:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:01:46 -0500, "ColoNel Polyps" <Extermination of
the christian jew cop government is inevitable @ Resistance is
futile.> wrote:

Seems like everyone takes advantage of you in some way or fashion.
What kind of pussy *are* you, anyway?


author: dstaples

subject: Re: Drug Dealer Named Buster

text:
"You Know Who" <[email] > wrote in message
news:[email]...
one crazy mo fo by the looks of it


author: Shoghi Effendi

subject: Re: W H A T   I S   T H E   B A H A ' I   F A I T H ?

text:
Dearly Beloved Friends and Co-workers in the Cause,

The Master clearly stated in his Will and Testament, that earth shattering,
priceless statement, nay charter of a new and excellent, portentous,
overwhelming World Order that all matters of dispute, of contention, of
doubt, of import or of concern, should, would, indeed must, of a certainty
unparalleled in the history of any of the many and varied religions that
have flourished at different and differing periods, nay epochs of the
history of this disturbed and turmoiled world of existence far from the
celestial kingdom yet incontrovertibly a part of it and man's ever onward
progress towards union with He who created all that is in the heavens and
earth and much else besides, which existence we know not of for it is veiled
from this part of the creation, be brought, laid and placed at the foot of
the Guardian, that inestimable yet approachable sign of the revelation of
continuing guidance, the essence of the guarantee of continual and perpetual
guidance, although he is but a man, save only when in his august, dignified,
honourable, yet ultimately humble position and the House of Justice, that is
the Universal House of Justice, that Universal House Of Justice that can be
so clearly identified and associated with the cause, in that it has, as
required and for reasons that will become clear, excused women from the
arduous duties of membership, that very same House whose existence
prophesied in prior eons and its immaculacy guaranteed, whose effulgence,
well denominated by the sacred pen of him in whose service we all are, shall
like a beacon in this present world order, so sadly constrained and limited
and, as yet, unaware of those strictures, nay punishments, that shall
inevitably flow from its crumbling and disintegrating institutions disegard
for the effusions of the pen, shine out.

Within the community of those hardened in the spirit, tempered in the fire
and not content to languish in turpitude whilst but one soul, ever desirous
of giving ear to the evocations of the verse, there has sadly, lamentably
yet not unexpectedly arisen the word of one whose word, like unto the
emanations of that voice crying in the wilderness, has caused distress, nay
sorrow, tumult and disorder amongst the community of the Beliefnet name.

Listen unto him, my dear brothers and sisters and co-workers. Listen unto
him for he speaks words of wisdom.

Your true brother,

Shoghi

"george.fleming2" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
and


author: ROBIN M PETERS

text:
It's nice that you posted this document, George, but really - why so much
activity, especially lately?

Robin Peters
http://www.epinions.com/user-kidnykid
http://www.epinions.com/content_2796003460/stf_~1
http://www.epinions.com/content_2814812292/stf_~1
Record casualties - my wits, as in frightened out of.
(Leonard McCoy, MD, ship's surgeon, USS Enterprise)


author: Bahai Faith

text:
"ROBIN M PETERS" <[email]> wrote in message
news:y3w89.2323$[email]...

The fundamentalists among my fellow bahais have often
attacked talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai in late
August and the early fall. It may have something to do
with their just being back from bahai school where they've
been whipped up into a frenzy of fanaticism to "protect"
the faith, etc.... It has always seemed to me to be a
concerted effort, though presented as coming from one
individual.... This is definitely at least the THIRD year
that this has happen about this time. It's easy enough to
corroborate the fact by using the archives on google or
on my website if you'd like.

I believe Dermod's observation that individual fanatics
are used by the administration for such purposes and
then dumped when the heat gets too hot is suggestive....


author: Robin Peters

text:
I'd tend to agree with Dermod and Fred here but for one thing. There's this
"minor" problem - Baha'is who are enrolled with an affiliate NSA of Haifa's are
banned from associating with CBers. If George is himself enrolled with either
the UK or the US NSA, that means he can't post here, particularly:

1. if he's convinced it's a CBer newsgroup, which he apparently is. That means
that if this is a CBer NG, and he's still enrolled, the UHJ and the Hands will
consider him a CBer, especially if they've labeled it a CB hangout. They will
be convinced he's going to get the CB infection from associating with CBers and
will therefore tell him to shun the group entirely.

2. if he responds to one of Joel Marangella's posts. Joel B. Marangella is the
Guardian of the Orthodox Baha'i Faith, a Remeyite group which has been declared
a CB group by Haifa. 'Nuff said.

Robin Peters
http://www.epinions.com/content_2814812292/stf_~1
"Record casualties - my wits, as in 'frightened out of.'"
Leonard McCoy, MD, ship's surgeon, USS Enterprise
http://www.epinions.com/user-kidnykid
http://www.epinions.com/content_2796003460


author: Thomass Square

subject: on virgins

text:
What do you call a Virgin on a water bed?

A CHERRY FLOAT!!!!

b


author: Don Stockbauer

subject: Re: on virgins

text:
On Mar 26, 8:04 pm, Thomass Square <comprehensivecenter> wrote:

So - the Irish bury people with their ass sticking out of the ground?


subject: Re: on virgins

text:
On Mar 27, 4:46 am, nikolai kingsley
<[email]> wrote:

Good one.


author: euclid

subject: Re: on virgins

text:
On Mar 26, 11:09 pm, "Don Stockbauer" <[email]>
wrote:

I'm more intrigued by the idea that their asses are made of
porcelain.  Their gait must be very strange.

euclid


subject: Re: on virgins

text:
On Mar 27, 9:07 am, "euclid" <[email]> wrote:

The original "hard-asses".


author: SCARECROW

subject: Re: on virgins

text:
On Mar 27, 10:25 pm, "Don Stockbauer" <[email]>
wrote:

No, that was the Germans.


author: Kent Paul Dolan

subject: Re: on virgins

text:
"euclid" <[email]> wrote

I was figuring that coating them with clay and
firing them in a kiln was part of the death ritual,
sort of a combined cremation/preservation.

xanthian.

"An ass in life, his ass remains his most prominent
feature after death."

And as for their gait, not letting it hit them in
their asses on the way out is also a big part of the
ritual.


subject: Re: on virgins

text:
On Mar 28, 1:19 pm, "Kent Paul Dolan" <[email]> wrote:

No, you were looking at that bee hive over there and thinking of
scooping up a jar of honey and bees and sticking your flaccid penis in
it in the hopes that the kink of the sting might finally get you off
after all these years.


subject: Re: on virgins

text:
On Mar 28, 1:27 pm, "SCARECROW" <[email]>
wrote:

Works better with fire ants.  Less chance of getting stung to death.


author: nikolai kingsley

subject: Re: on virgins

text: that joke was invented about thirty seconds after the bicycle.


author: Ace Lightning

subject: Re: on virgins

text:
nikolai kingsley wrote:

no wonder there are so many bicycle thefts in Ireland.


author: Milton John Kleim, Jr.

text:
Islam, Christianity, and Our Pagan Heritage *

When the intolerance and injustice of the Koran and Islamic society as
a whole is presented to a Muslim, the nearly invariable retort is that
"Christianity is just as bad."

Well, they're right!

As a European heathen, that is, a person who believes as my
Nature-revering, gender-equitous ancestors did, I'm not responsible
for Christianity's crimes across the globe.  However, my spiritual
heritage is indeed responsible for the vast wealth of cultural
traditions billions on Earth value, practice, and long for.

The West's heritage of freedom is not a "gift from the Bible."
Hardly.  Rather, it is a bounty of goodness bestowed by the pagan
cultures of the Celtic, Germanic, Balto-Slavic and related peoples of
ancient Europe.  The rights of women, the concept of participatory
government, freedom of thought and expression, all pre-Christian and
alien to "the Book" religions.

The so-called "Bible believing" Christians, most of whom have never
read the Bible, are widely expressing unity with Muslims, citing their
belief that Islam is a "religion of peace" akin to Christianity.
George W. Bush is foremost among them.  Considering that Christianity
and Islam share far more than they diverge on, including the primary
traits of uncompromising universalist application, exclusivity for
adherents, and reverence for the man-made, hodge-podge,
self-contradictory "Holy Bible," this really isn't a surprise.

Christianity's scriptures are far more similar to the Koran than most
Christians realize.  And most Christians aren't aware that, if taken
seriously and at face value, Christians are commanded to believe as
Torquemada, as Muslims are commanded to believe as bin Laden.  Both
the Bible and the Koran demand intolerance of other beliefs, require
grave penalties for "unbelievers," and teach fanaticism in the name of
their god and spiritual leader.

How has the West progressed to the unprecedented level of liberty and
wealth considering its predominate Christian ideology?  Quite simply,
unlike in the Middle East, birthplace of "the Book," pagan culture was
not eradicated as Christian leaders like Charlemagne had hoped for.
Much of what is regarded as Christian is nothing of the sort.
Libertarian philosophy, many essential "Christian" beliefs, and even
most holidays (both "Christmas"
and Easter, for example), are pagan in origin.  The healthy influence
of our ancestors' benevolent, harmonic ways has "domesticated"
Christianity in European civilization, the process of syncretism
"watering-down" much
of the exclusively Middle Eastern mentality of "the Book."
Unfortunately, Islam has had fewer centuries, and hardly any pagan
influence to de-radicalize its inherent fanatical nature.  From the
beginning, Islam had been definitively extreme in outlook and action.
Some pacificism of Islamic thought has occurred, but because of the
social nature of the Islamic world, this has been violently suppressed
(witness Rushdie) and embracers of a "kinder, gentler" Islam are quite
rare.  Islam has had no "Martin Luther" -- or anyone approaching him.
It's unlikely it will ever develop one, either.  Islam's
self-reinforcing, quasi-fascist order won't allow it.

When a Muslim or an ally of Islam condemns Christianity, I'll have to
agree.  The harshness of the desert led to the harsh absolutes
contained in "the Book."  The harmony and holism of African, Asian,
Australian, European, and Native American pagan beliefs are as
diversely beautiful as they are different from the mentally and
spiritually rigid -- even unbalanced -- Way of the Desert.

I will also point out to Muslim and Christian alike that what human
beings value in the West -- what America best represents -- is
heathen; an opportunity to live one's life as one sees fit.  Heathen
freedom is what has brought millions to the West, not the ideology of
"the Book."

In this "war on terrorism," or, as Muslims rightly see it, war on
Islam, I will not yield my heritage one iota to any Enemy, foreign or
domestic.  We are fighting for heathen principles, not Christian ones.
 Muslims are welcome to join the majority of humanity -- embracing a
heathen/pagan heritage under many names -- or they can hang on to the
anachronistic nonsense and wrong-doing their ancestors of the 7th
century had imposed upon them by Muhammed's sword.

==

* Throughout this article, it is my intention that "heathen" and
"pagan" be interchangable for all intents and purposes.  "Heathen"
refers to the "people of the heath," i.e., people living outside the
cities, practicing "unofficial" and "unapproved" belief systems under
ancient politico-religious regimes.  "Pagan" refers to the Latin word
"paganus," meaning, similarly to heathen, "rural folk," or, in modern
equivolency, "hill-billies" or "country bumpkins."  Of course, then,
as now, this was intended to shame not only
the people themselves, but their beliefs and culture.  However,
anthropology has shown that these ancient "hill-billies" were far more
advanced than popularly believed -- sometimes more advanced than their
persecutors of the "superior" religions (witness especially the
Druids).  The modern revival of pagan/heathen culture has occurred
because of the failure of "the Book" religions to give people
spiritual and philosophical satisfaction in the
face of corrosion of family, society, and our planet.

==

http://www.efn.org/~mjk/


author: DR. LAWRENCE PIERCE

subject: Why don't Greens go first?

text:
Question: If Greens consider humans to be a "plague" in
nature, then why don't they shoot themselves first and
set an example for the rest of us?

If we figure that fifty percent of the planet is concerned
about human pollution, then if they would do themselves in,
there would be fifty percent more oxygen for the rest of us
to breathe, fifty percent more land available for food
production, and fifty percent fewer humans to pollute the
land with their raw excrement.

The greens I've met have more respect for the average sewer
rat than for any humans. This is not in keeping with the
tradition of the first conservationists like John Muir and
Teddy Roosevelt, who wanted to preserve natural places FOR
the enjoyment of humans. Today's wacked out environmentalists
(aka WOEs) wish to isolate humans away from nature and
nature away from humans to enjoy.

There seems to be a worm inside their brains trying to eat
its way out and causing a form of insanity directed against
their own kind. There is no other explanation, except maybe
drug abuse.


author: Enough Already

subject: Re: Why don't Greens go first?

text:
[email] (DR. LAWRENCE PIERCE) wrote in message news:<attluq$hul$[email]>...

That sleazy "suicide argument" is used by growth-addicts when they
know they can't deny the hard evidence for overpopulation. Here is a
page full of related arguments used by these punks:

 http://enough_already.tripod.com/cliches.htm

You obviously know little about John Muir. He was an aesthetic
preservationist and the first President of the Sierra Club. Were he
alive today, you'd be calling him a "green weenie" and every other
Creationist/nature-hater cliche. Read Muir's bio here:

http://www.ecotopia.org/ehof/muir/bio.html

"These temple destroyers, devotees of ravaging commercialism, seem to
have a perfect contempt for Nature, and, instead of lifting their eyes
to the God of the mountains, lift them to the Almighty Dollar."  (John
Muir quote)

Little has changed in right-wing attitudes toward nature since that
was written many years ago.

As for Roosevelt, he had to go behind the backs of greedy Republicans
to save millions of acres of wilderness we take for granted today. But
"conserv"atives like Bush are itching to open up those preserved lands
and share little of his values.

E.A.

http://enough_already.tripod.com/
If any other species behaved like Man we'd call it a plague.


author: Roy. Just Roy.

subject: Re: Why don't Greens go first?

text:
[email] (DR. LAWRENCE PIERCE) wrote in message news:<attluq$hul$[email]>...

Hey Louie, how's band practice?

Big IF right off the bat there Louie. Humans aren't the problem -
humans making too many humans are the problem.

It's a matter of resources. If you consider a baby, he's got about
70 years on this planet with which to eat and poop. Greens have less
than half that number of years left. The burden is on the babies.

Actually, 50% of the planet is concerned more with how to obtain
their next meal.

Rarity determines value in a free market system. That's why diamonds
are expensive and bread is not. Humans are only worth about $1.34 in
their trace minerals - and if you count processing costs, it isn't even
worth the money to extract the minerals out.

Read your history again. Muir wanted to keep people OUT of
Yellowstone all together. If it wasn't for his lobbying,
today's park would have been divided up into neat 64-acre plots
for claim under the Homestead Act.

My, you must think you're clever, with your little catch phrase.

Humans enjoying nature is one thing. Humans drilling for oil right
in the middle of nature is quite another.

Not since we got trichinomiasis under control.

Try this one on for size - common sense. Now go run along, Louie,
your mother's calling, and it's time to eat your mac & cheese.


author: Farley Benn

subject: Re: Why don't Greens go first?

text:
In article <[email]>, Enough Already wrote:

The problem is that the people who SAY they are not growth-addicts ARE
in fact growth-addicts.

The problem is fundamental to the system and can't be avoided without
avoiding the entire system.

Denial is not just a river in Egypt, eh?

[....]

Farley


author: Kurt Strand

subject: Re: Why don't Greens go first?

text:
Very funny Roy, and who says greens don't have a sense of humor!  don't
forget that with the relaxed meat inspection standards trichinomiasis may be
on its way back.
"Roy. Just Roy." <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...
news:<attluq$hul$[email]>...


author: Roger Coppock

subject: Re: Why don't Greens go first?

text:
Kurt Strand wrote:

And, so may be cannibalism.  With air heads like the "Dr."
outside of institutions, and still breathing, any outrage
is possible.

-.-. --.- Roger

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----


author: rafinn

subject: Re: I tell you in short who Ataturk was and still is.

text:
Oh look what we have here.. a flower child or a hippy? I personally
don't hate all greeks, but i hate the ones that are preparing tricks
and posting hate messages about Turks. I am sure Mark thinks similar to
me.  If you look at the recent postings you can see their  nasty lies
about Ataturk. You are trying to focus on the place you want   and
ignore others since this logically makes sense to you. But it doesn't
make sense to us Mr smartass. If greeks support PKK and other terrorist
organizations that killed thousands of new born babies in eastern
anatolia  and if we can prove it even with pictures and mention it in
articles is this a hate posting? If they are trying to use all the
minorities that  are living in Turkiye and   provocating them, if they
are trying to create fake genocides  and if we  demonstrate the
opposite and their collaboration with real nazis, if they are educating
their kids to be racists and hostile to Turks and if we  can
demonstrate this with excerpts from their schoolbooks  and post them in
these forums, if they are continously posting negative things about
Turkey's entrance to EU and if we react them with our own reasonings,
are we haters?

No but if tend to ignore these facts and  especially focus on seeing
others' rights and wrongs then you are not fair and you have no right
to criticize us. Low man always has tricks.


author: Henry Hooray

text:
"rafinn" <[email]> wrote in message
news:[email]...

Let's just go back to the original postings, shall we?

marktirivers post endlessly, and seemingly endless (has anybody - including
the poster himself - ever read a single of his exceedingly diatribes all the
way through?), and invariably foaming and with eyes rolling highly selected
one-sided anti-Greek material.

He then posts a little bit from Ataturk, seemingly in order to promote this
man's thinking. And, funnily enough, martrivers behaves in exactly the
opposite way of what Ataturk has just been quoted for saying - funny, don't
you agree.

You may not "hate all greeks", rafinn. Is there anything to indicate that
marktrivers shares that sweet compassion of yours? If so, I certainly
haven't seen it.

For what it's worth, some of us don't actually hate Turks. Not just don't we
not 'hate all Turks', but don't actually hate Turks by dint of them having a
particular nationality. Perhaps it is for this reason that you will not be
able to find a single piece on the Internet where I express myself in a
derogatory way about Turkey of the Turks.

Henry.


author: gogu

text:
? "rafinn" <[email]> ?????? ??? ??????
news:[email]...

LIAR !

But you adore Turks posting hate messages about Greeks ;-)
Oh well, you are just the usual NAZI Turk after all...

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
If he is a Turk, then he is excused ;-)
Typical Turkish HYPOCRISY ;-)

But you are closing you eyes about the hate postings by Seanie, trnc,
martrivers, etc against the Greeks !
Amazing Turkish HYPOCRISY ;-)

Don't try to look good filth, you are a well known GREEK-HATER and a
BARBARIAN !

-------------
? "rafinn" <[email]> ?????? ??? ??????
news:[email]...

I am turkish and i also have an american citizenship too. We will deal
with
this problem don't worry. We will show the armenians that we don't
actually believe their craps and we are not going to give up on  our
most important NATO ally in the middle east. Turkish army came to the
help of american soldiers in Korean war and they fought together. Where
were the armenians at that time? Don't forget that armenia was once a
part of soviet union and most of its people still have that attitude.
Armenians joined forces with russians and killed hundreds of thousands
of Turks . An american professor already demonstrated this fact. You
are the one who did this genocide. Keep your craps to yourselves...
------------------------
? <[email]> ?????? ??? ??????
news:[email]...

Gogu has a stupid homepage;  trying to  show that macedonia  and some
other places belong to ancient greece. He is periodically visiting
Turkey; taking pictures of historic places, and making  stupid and
extremely subjective comments about history. Listen to me loser; why
don't you tell your identity in this forum; so that  we can bust your
stupid ass when you  come to Turkiye again. We like tourists; but we
have no tolerance to people who smile to our face and talk after our
back. Turkiye will enter EU in the near future even if you don't like
and we are going to be much stronger. Do your best and try our
patience...
-----------------

A THREATENING BARBARIAN Turk, that's it.

PWN !


author: Dave Banisar

subject: Inman Withdraws from DoD Appointment

text:
CNN reported this morning that Admiral Bobby Ray Inman has withdrawn from
consideration for the position of Secretary of Defense. A press
conference is scheduled for 1pm today (tuesday).


subject: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
For those of you that missed it,  Inman placed most of the blame on NYT
columnist Safire for his withdraw and accused him among other things of
him and Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole engaging in a conspiracy to
oppose him. He later admitted that he thought that he would have still
been accepted by over 90 votes and that he was unable to confirm the
opposition with any Senators.  He also claimed that several newspapers
had supressed letters against Safire's and other columnists but then said
that the press  covereage had been very fair  to him.


author: Arthur Bernard Byrne

subject: Re: Inman Withdraws from DoD Appointment

text:
In article <2hh428$[email]>,
Dave Banisar  <[email]> wrote:

	Hurrah!

AB^2


text:
In article <[email]> Thomas C. Allard,
[email] writes:

Safire wrote an article a few weeks ago accusing Inman of being "a tax
cheat" for not paying SSA on his maid for several (9?) years, of being a
failure at business for his performance at Tracor and other places and
being untrustworthy for some of the stuff Inman did as Deptuty Director
of the CIA. It was a pretty harsh column. It appeared in at least a
dozen newspapers.

In interviews last night Inman withdrew his conspiracy and plagerism
against Safire. Its too bad that Safire didn't mention any of the crypto
stuff that Inman had done, it could have actually started a real public
debate about secrecy and science, privacy, the role of the NSA etc.


author: Robert Krawitz

subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
In article <[email]> [email] (Paul Flaherty) writes:

   The primary (valid) reason for such cooperation is the protection of
   sources.  The compromise of SIGINT sources is merely very expensive,
   while the cost of compromising a HUMINT source may be the loss of
   human life.  The second reason is to protect an operation that has
   yet to be executed.  Examples of where the press has bungled National
   Security in these ways include:

   1. The Post's Pentagon Papers story, which compromised a SIGINT source
	   (Kremlin carphones were an easy target).

Actually, the Pentagon Papers seems a particularly good example of the
press doing its job.  Compromise of intelligence sources or no, it did
expose rather scandalous practices in the defense establishment.
Somebody has to be able to bring the government to book when it does
things that are wrong, because the government won't do it on its own.


author: Hal

subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
I saw a portion of the Inman press conference in which he discussed
a program in which he participated for a number of years as head of
the National Security Agency.  He would review stories about to be
published in the newspaper to determine whether they would be harmful
to the interests of the United States government.  The newspaper
involved (the Wall Street Journal?) participated in this review program
voluntarily, according to Inman.

I was surprised and shocked at this activity and I'd like to hear more
about it.  Such pre-publication review by the government flirts with
infringing on freedom of the press, especially since we have no way
of knowing what pressures the government may have brought to assure
this "voluntary" cooperation.  It is especially worrisome when the
review is being performed by one of the most secretive branches of
the government, and the public is not kept informed about it.

Hal Finney
[email]


author: John De Armond

text:
[email] (Arthur Bernard Byrne) writes:

Yes indeed.  I sure would like to see what's hiding in HIS closet.

John


author: Alan Westrope

text:
In article <2hjfaq$[email]>, Dave Banisar wrote:

While at the library yesterday, I decided to take a look at the article
(I assume you mean Safire's Dec. 23 NYT essay).  Safire recounts how he
praised Inman in a 1980 column for reporting a suspicious call (by Billy
Carter to the Libyan Embassy) to President Carter.  Safire got a call from
Inman complaining about the "irreparable harm you have done by revealing
our sources and methods."  Safire continues:

"It was hard to believe that the Libyans did not know that all embassy
 phone lines were routinely tapped, but I respectfully asked if he would
 entertain one question.  Icily, the admiral informed me he never talked
 to the press, but what was it I wanted to know?  I asked him how a grown
 man could go through life calling himself "Bobby"; he slammed the phone
 down.  Downhill from there."

So *sensitive*...:-)

Alan Westrope                  <[email]>
KeyID: 359639                  <[email]>
PGP fingerprint:  D6 89 74 03 77 C8 2D 43   7C CA 6D 57 29 25 69 23
finger for public key


author: W. Kinney

subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
In article <[email]>, Hal <[email]> wrote:
[...]

I read a transcript of the (entire) press conference in the N.Y. Times.
I think the real telling point here is that papers were calling Inman at
_home_ after he'd left the agency because the NSA had ceased to be
cooperative about giving them the intel they needed about how not to screw
up people's cover:

"When I retired from the government back in 1982, Mr. Casey decided he
wanted to pick up that [advisory to editors] role, and it very quickly died.
But I suddenly found, living down here in Austin, Tex., that I continued
to get calls from editors asking for advice because they couldn't get an
answer from the Government, and then from time to time from working
reporters, asking help to understand backgrounds for stories."

Is is really that hard to believe that editors would rather _not_
accidentally compromise intelligence sources, and actually appreciate
somebody who would give them a straight answer?

Of course, this is based on Inman's statements, and Inman seems to have been
sniffing way too much glue lately. Nonetheless, absent any evidence to the
contrary, this appears to be a lot less sinister than the fertile
imaginations of Usenet are making it out to be.

                                -- Will


subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
[email] (Hal) writes:

Oh bullshit.  Have you not the mental capacity to understand the difference
between government censorship and voluntary cooperation with the government?
I'm very happy to find that WSJ and the other periodicals have the sense
of civic duty to cooperate.  Irrational conspiracy theories to the contrary,
there ARE things that should not be publicized at a particular time and
place.  Since it is the periodical's final call whether to publish after
considering the government's concerns, I have absolutely NO problem
with such schemes.

John

c


author: John K. Taber

text:
Alan Westrope ([email]) wrote:
: In article <2hjfaq$[email]>, Dave Banisar wrote:
: >
: > Safire wrote an article a few weeks ago accusing Inman of being "a tax
: > cheat" for not paying SSA on his maid for several (9?) years, of being a
: > failure at business for his performance at Tracor and other places and
: > being untrustworthy for some of the stuff Inman did as Deptuty Director
: > of the CIA. It was a pretty harsh column. It appeared in at least a
: > dozen newspapers.

: While at the library yesterday, I decided to take a look at the article
: (I assume you mean Safire's Dec. 23 NYT essay).  Safire recounts how he
: praised Inman in a 1980 column for reporting a suspicious call (by Billy
: Carter to the Libyan Embassy) to President Carter.  Safire got a call from
: Inman complaining about the "irreparable harm you have done by revealing
: our sources and methods."  Safire continues:

: "It was hard to believe that the Libyans did not know that all embassy
:  phone lines were routinely tapped, but I respectfully asked if he would
:  entertain one question.  Icily, the admiral informed me he never talked
:  to the press, but what was it I wanted to know?  I asked him how a grown
:  man could go through life calling himself "Bobby"; he slammed the phone
:  down.  Downhill from there."

: So *sensitive*...:-)

: Alan Westrope                  <[email]>
: KeyID: 359639                  <[email]>
: PGP fingerprint:  D6 89 74 03 77 C8 2D 43   7C CA 6D 57 29 25 69 23
: finger for public key

It was a question intended to insult.  I understand that Bobby is his
given name.  There are many first names given in the South that don't
sound like first names.  Bobby is not a nickname for Robert for Inman.
It's his given name.

Safire the pontificator surely knew that.  And he is taking advantage
of your ignorance of Southern names to ridicule the man in your eyes.


author: Mike McNally

subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
[email] (John De Armond) writes:

Well, I know the difference, but that doesn't make it less worrisome.  I
fully support the WSJ in their decision to participate in this activity,
but one must wonder what would happen if the practise became common and
taken for granted by some future administration.  Should a newspaper with
a political bent markedly different from that of the people in power,
the issue could get sticky: "Other newspapers participate in this review
process; aren't you interested in protecting our National Security?"

I would be interested to know how often stories were found to be
"unacceptable" and what kind of stories those were.  Remember that many
such programs designed to "protect National Security" are really there
to protect political security.  For example, I believe that the government
still classifies recon photos of parts of this country (military bases,
mostly) and will not sell them to US citizens, even though French and
Russian satellites have taken photos of the area and can and do sell those
to anybody with the bucks to pay for them.


author: Richard Roda

subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
In article <97t3#[email]> [email] (John De Armond) writes:
You must remember that the word "voluntary" has a different meaning in the
government's lexicon then in normal usage.  For example, the Japanese have a
voluntary program to restrict exports to the United States because they know
that absent such a program, the US would enact something that is worse.
Thus there is a threat to the Japanese.  In normal usage, "voluntary" would
not be used because the government is responding to a threat.  However,
governmentspeak is different.

It is concievable that the government could threaten the company to comply
with the "voluntary" program.  Since the government takes money by force
from its citizens (the process called taxation), their resources have a much
higher limit than the resources of a company that must compete with other
companies in a marketplace consisting of only part of the citizens.
Therefore, even the threat of a lawsuit, even though the government would
lose, can be enough to control behavior.  Such modified behavior will be
voluntary in the governmental lexicon even though it is a result of a
threat.  I challenge you to produce an example of something that should not
be published at a particular time and place.  If it is the truth, it should
be known.  Prove your assertion.


subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
[email] (Mike McNally) writes:

You Know that for a fact?  Do you have the necessary Top Secret clearance,
the TS-SI and the proper need to know to be privvy to whatever the
government has ASKED to be withheld?  Or are you speculating based on
what you've been told by the media?

While I acknowledge that the classification process can be used to
hide political secrets, that is not relevant here.  Without having
been privvy to any of the requests, I can surely speculate about
many much more mundane items that might need to be held for awhile.
Things like public antagonists being parties to secret peace negotiations.
Or business or financial intelligence that might jeopardize government-
mediated business deals highly advantageous to this country.  Since
this program is/was voluntary, the media outlet still holds the final
say and as such, the government will have to make its case in no
uncertain terms.  A very reasonable check and balance in my book.

The issue is not the photos but the capabilities of the cameras/sattelites.
A vast amount of intelligence can be gained by someone who knows what
they are doing by looking at the artifacts contained on such pictures.
As much as I'd like to see such pictures, I see no need sacrifice
our edge in intelligence when the aforementioned countries are filling
the need.

A much stronger case against classification can be made of atomic and
crypto secrets, particularly those of WWII vintage.

John


author: Scott McClung

subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
In article <m5.758997671@vail> [email] (Mike McNally) writes:

I was a little surprised to find out that this is true.  One of my DOD
clients buys digital satellite photographs from a company which, it
is my understanding, buys some from the Russians.  These are low-quality
images of this base, but I don't think you can buy them from the US
government.  I'm not sure about Landsat, or other non-military satellites,
though.


author: Paul Flaherty

subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
[email] (Mike McNally) writes:

The primary (valid) reason for such cooperation is the protection of sources.
The compromise of SIGINT sources is merely very expensive, while the cost
of compromising a HUMINT source may be the loss of human life.  The second
reason is to protect an operation that has yet to be executed.  Examples of
where the press has bungled National Security in these ways include:

1. The Post's Pentagon Papers story, which compromised a SIGINT source
	(Kremlin carphones were an easy target).
2. An NYT(?) story which fingered Wm Buckley as the CIA Station Chief in Beruit
	(Buckley was later kidnapped and executed).
3. An NYT(?) story which leaked the basic coalition strategy for the Desert
	Storm ground war (fortunately Saddam's intel was lousy).


subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
[email] (Richard Roda) writes:

How 'bout we drop the hypothetical BS?  Why don't you explain how the
government can harrass a media outlet such as the WSJ or NYT or the
TV networks.  BE sure to outline how the government will do this without
creating an even bigger story for the outlet.  There's an old saying that
goes "You don't screw with people who buy ink by the tanker".  The media
understands it.  The government understand it. QED

John


subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
[email] (Richard Roda) writes:

Trivially easy.  A fine example is the case where the military asked
CNN and other media not to report on troop or materiel movements in
Saudi Arabia they may have observed just before the invasion of
Kuwait.  They cooperated and reported that fact after the war.
You DO remember Desert Storm, don't you.

John


author: Jim Huggins

subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
In article <[email]>,
Richard Roda <[email]> wrote:
|In article <97t3#[email]> [email] (John De Armond) writes:
|>[email] (Hal) writes:
|>
|>>I saw a portion of the Inman press conference in which he discussed
|>>a program in which he participated for a number of years as head of
|>>the National Security Agency.  He would review stories about to be
|>>published in the newspaper to determine whether they would be harmful
|>>to the interests of the United States government.  The newspaper
|>>involved (the Wall Street Journal?) participated in this review program
|>>voluntarily, according to Inman.
|>
|>>I was surprised and shocked at this activity and I'd like to hear more
|>>about it.  [snip ...]
|>
|>Oh bullshit.  Have you not the mental capacity to understand the difference
|>between government censorship and voluntary cooperation with the government?
|>[snip ...]
|>
|You must remember that the word "voluntary" has a different meaning in the
|government's lexicon then in normal usage.  [snip ...]
|
|It is concievable that the government could threaten the company to comply
|with the "voluntary" program.  Since the government takes money by force
|from its citizens (the process called taxation), their resources have a much
|higher limit than the resources of a company that must compete with other
|companies in a marketplace consisting of only part of the citizens.
|Therefore, even the threat of a lawsuit, even though the government would
|lose, can be enough to control behavior.  Such modified behavior will be
|voluntary in the governmental lexicon even though it is a result of a
|threat.  I challenge you to produce an example of something that should not
|be published at a particular time and place.  If it is the truth, it should
|be known.  Prove your assertion.

1) Secret negotiations between long-time combatants, which could be
   terribly complicated by tons of outside comments (many of which
   would be inflammatory).  Examples: recent talks between Great Britain
   and Ireland regarding the status of Northern Ireland; recent talks
   between Israel and the PLO regarding official recognition and
   direct negotiation regarding the future of the occupied territories.
   IMHO, the fact that the world didn't know about these negotiations
   made them possible.

2) Speculations regarding on-going criminal investigations, which could
   tip-off the suspects.  Examples: the World Trade Center bombing, in
   which certain descriptions of the suspects made it harder to find
   them (since they were alerted to police pursuit); the recent
   Nancy Kerrigan/Tonya Harding skating business, where the flurry of
   activity made the official taking of depositions and the issuing
   of warrants much slower than could have happened otherwise.

3) Surprise birthday parties.  :-)


subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
In article <[email]> [email] (John De Armond) writes:

   [email] (Mike McNally) writes:

   You Know that for a fact?  Do you have the necessary Top Secret clearance,
   the TS-SI and the proper need to know to be privvy to whatever the
   government has ASKED to be withheld?  Or are you speculating based on
   what you've been told by the media?

COINTELPRO, anyone?

Rather than answering your question (I don't have a security clearance
and I don't want one), I will put it rather differently:  I want to know
what the government is doing in my name.  I don't want a secret
government doing things without public accountability.  Maybe it's not
in my best interests for everyone to know what the government is doing,
but unfortunately it's impossible to judge.  I'd rather risk getting
burned knowing too much than too little, thank you.

   While I acknowledge that the classification process can be used to
   hide political secrets, that is not relevant here.  Without having
   been privvy to any of the requests, I can surely speculate about
   many much more mundane items that might need to be held for awhile.
   Things like public antagonists being parties to secret peace negotiations.
   Or business or financial intelligence that might jeopardize government-
   mediated business deals highly advantageous to this country.  Since
   this program is/was voluntary, the media outlet still holds the final
   say and as such, the government will have to make its case in no
   uncertain terms.  A very reasonable check and balance in my book.

If that's all it goes.  But if the government implies (or worse) that
the IRS will do a full audit of my business if I don't comply, things
are a bit different.

   The issue is not the photos but the capabilities of the cameras/sattelites.
   A vast amount of intelligence can be gained by someone who knows what
   they are doing by looking at the artifacts contained on such pictures.
   As much as I'd like to see such pictures, I see no need sacrifice
   our edge in intelligence when the aforementioned countries are filling
   the need.

Granted, but if they really wanted to they could simply blur the images,
and this does mean that we're losing an opportunity to earn money off
these pictures.  However, I can't help but chuckle a bit about the GPS
(Global Positioning System) mess.  GPS data is broadcast with the low
bits encrypted so that civilian GPS receivers can only get accuracy to
100 meters or so, compared to 10 meters for military equipment.  During
the Gulf war (!), though, the encryption was turned off (I've been told)
because there weren't enough military receivers, so the military needed
to purchase commercial equipment.

Encryption or no, civilian equipment is now ahead of military equipment,
because of advances in technology (differential GPS, using multiple
receivers).  That's capable of what, 1 meter accuracy?

   A much stronger case against classification can be made of atomic and
   crypto secrets, particularly those of WWII vintage.

Indeed.


subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
In article <[email]> [email] (John De Armond) writes:

   [email] (Robert Krawitz) writes:

   Well first off, under our representative form of government, you have
   no right to be privvy to everything the government does.  Your
   elected representatives do.

Well, as it happens, even my elected representatives don't, unless they
happen to be sitting on the right committees.  It's my understanding
that the people who sit on those committees have to get security
clearances.  I wonder what would happen if, say, Bernard Sanders were to
be offered a seat on the armed services committee, and his security
clearance were to be denied?

Secondly, I didn't say that as it stands I *do* have a right to know
everything that the government does; it's just that I think that the
people *should*.  Since we elect our representatives, we need
information (not just campaign promises) on which to base our decisions.

   Secondly, unless you are intimately involved in the government process
   you do NOT know what is going on; you simply know what you've been
   told by the big media -a entity I trust less than the government.

In that case the media is serving a very important purpose.  I think
that it's important that we know what's going on, and if the media is
capable of doing that, good for the media.  At least when abuses occur
in the media someone (as often as not from the competition) finds out
and makes it public.

   And when the recipient of that threat, say, the WSJ, puts the transcript
   on Page 1, the IRS goes down in flames.  perhaps you don't yet realize
   it but at the levels we're talking about, the media is at least as
   powerful as the government.  Hell, it took down Nixon and elected
   Clinton didn't it?

My example was actually "you report our foreign policy screwup, and
we'll put the IRS on you."  If a stupid government operation goes down
in flames, what's the loss?

Nixon screwed himself up, and tried to hide it.  The media found out
about it, and quite naturally gave it headlines.  But the media didn't
take down Nixon -- the threat of impeachment did.

As for Clinton, I won't take the bait.  Clinton was elected by a
plurality of the electorate and a majority of the electoral college, and
that's all there is to it.

   A lot of the things people have become acustomed to assuming are rights
   are really the inventions of the courts.  The problem is, these
   court-created rights can dissolve just as rapidly.  People have
   grown too lazy and expedient to do it properly - amend the constitution -
   and the republic is suffering for it.

The literal words of the constitution are not an absolute safeguard,
either.  The constitution is not supposed to be a listing of fine points
of law, but rather a collection of basic principles that are to be
interpreted broadly.

If it becomes that easy to amend the constitution, it would become just
as easy to amend the constitution to REMOVE some of the enumerated
rights.


author: Michael Froomkin

subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdrawread/followup/new

text:
In article <[email]>, [email] (Paul Flaherty) writes:
[....]

[...]

While I confess I do know the details of the Buckley case, I do know that for
many years it was the CIA's policy to have station chiefs (eg. the one in
AThens) be sufficiently "visible" as to allow potential sources and defectors
to find them.  The idea was that the station chief got some intel that way, and
toher people did the *really* secret stuff.   Thus, most stories (again, I
don't know if that is the case for this one or not) which attempt to link
newspaper X's fingering of a station chief with his (it's always a him) later
troubles are a bit bogus because lots and lots and lots of people in that town
knew exactly what he did.  And they were supposed to know.

[...]


subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
John De Armond ([email]) wrote:
: [email] (Richard Roda) writes:

: >You must remember that the word "voluntary" has a different meaning in the
: >government's lexicon then in normal usage.  For example, the Japanese have a
: >voluntary program to restrict exports to the United States because they know
: >that absent such a program, the US would enact something that is worse.
: >Thus there is a threat to the Japanese.  In normal usage, "voluntary" would
: >not be used because the government is responding to a threat.  However,
: >governmentspeak is different.

: How 'bout we drop the hypothetical BS?  Why don't you explain how the
: government can harrass a media outlet such as the WSJ or NYT or the
: TV networks.  BE sure to outline how the government will do this without
: creating an even bigger story for the outlet.  There's an old saying that
: goes "You don't screw with people who buy ink by the tanker".  The media
: understands it.  The government understand it. QED

: John

: --
: John De Armond, WD4OQC, Marietta, GA    [email]
: "Would you fire on US Citizens while in the process of confiscating their guns?"
:     A question on a survey given to members of the U.S. counterterrorist
:     unit Navy SEAL Team Six by their commanders last September.

Piece of cake!  You investigate them, that's how.  It's been done.  The
Hearst papers were opposed to our entry into WW I, and editorialized
against it.  After the Great War, Congress investigated the Hearst papers
for pro-German sympathies (code word, I suspect, since the meaning of
treason is severely restricted by the Constitution).

By the time the hearings were over, the Hearst papers saw the light, and
so far as I can tell never ever afterwards opposed Administration policy.


subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
[email] (Jim Huggins) writes:

Indeed, these and many other things are among the problems of government
in living with a free press.  Arguably, the society governed would in
some specific cases be "better off" without publication.  I'm sure there
are plenty of publications that exercise their own editorial abilities
to avoid such problems, and there are others that would be willing to
allow a government bureau to provide a yay/nay opinion on material prior
to publication.

That said, I'd fight to the death to protect the sanctity of the
First Amendment.  The right of the press (and every citizen) to publish
anything is far more valuable than the dubious benefits of enforced
a priori restraints on publication.


subject: Re: Inman Blames Safire for Withdraw

text:
[email] (Robert Krawitz) writes:

Well first off, under our representative form of government, you have
no right to be privvy to everything the government does.  Your
elected representatives do.

Secondly, unless you are intimately involved in the government process
you do NOT know what is going on; you simply know what you've been
told by the big media -a entity I trust less than the government.

And when the recipient of that threat, say, the WSJ, puts the transcript
on Page 1, the IRS goes down in flames.  perhaps you don't yet realize
it but at the levels we're talking about, the media is at least as
powerful as the government.  Hell, it took down Nixon and elected
Clinton didn't it?

A lot of the things people have become acustomed to assuming are rights
are really the inventions of the courts.  The problem is, these
court-created rights can dissolve just as rapidly.  People have
grown too lazy and expedient to do it properly - amend the constitution -
and the republic is suffering for it.

John