Linux-Advocacy Digest #232, Volume #33 Sat, 31 Mar 01 20:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Multitasking (Barry Manilow)
Re: Formatting a floppy (Barry Manilow)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (Roger)
Re: Formatting a floppy (Barry Manilow)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (Roger)
Re: Linux on Compaq...coming this Summer. ("Joseph Ogiba")
Re: Why can't we just all be friends? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("Paul 'Z' Ewande®")
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("Paul 'Z' Ewande®")
Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB? (Roger)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Joseph T. Adams")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Multitasking
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 15:44:11 -0800
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : > Said Paul 'Z' Ewande® in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 30 Mar 2001
>
> : > >> >What I do next is point out that you *still* haven't put forward the
> : > >evidence that NT multitasking is crap. you lose.
> : >
> : > That doesn't make NT's multitasking any more acceptable, though, does
> : > it?
> : >
> : It is not that good either. I know people who have used most OS's out
> : there.
>
> : The best multitaskers:
>
> : 1. Amiga
>
> Yeah. Great. Multitasking without any sort
> of reliable memory protection.
True, this was a flaw but the OS was pretty stable. I know people who
ran it for 11 years without even one crash. No OS is perfect! Can NT
run 110 programs at once with 50 MHZ and 16 MB? Didn't think so.
Then don't knock Amiga's multitasking.
>
> : 2. OS/2 Warp
> : 3. QNX (close third)
> : 4. BeOS (very good)
> : 5. Various Unixen, including Linux
> : 6. NT/Win2K
> : 7. Win XX
> : 8. Mac OS
>
> : This lineup is pretty indisputable. The only controversy seems to be
>
> The only thing that is indisputable is the fact
> that you are cognizant of absolutely nothing.
Ahhhhh. Elitism speaks.
--
Bob
Being flamed? Don't know why? Take the Flame Questionnaire(TM)
today!
Why do you think you are being flamed?
[ ] You continued a long, stupid thread
[ ] You started an off-topic thread
[ ] You posted something totally uninteresting
[ ] People don't like your tone of voice
[ ] Other (describe)
[ ] None of the above
------------------------------
From: Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Formatting a floppy
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 15:46:37 -0800
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Barry Manilow in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 30 Mar 2001 17:24:56
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >>
> >Format a floppy. Start a few downloads. Open up Office. Play an
> >MP3. Encode another MP3. Open up 3 separate videos and start playing
> >all of them. Start a couple of chess games. Render some graphics in
> >the background. Open Excel and calc a spreadsheet. Open up Word and
> >start typing in your word processor. Open up a full-screen session of
> >Doom and minimize it. Scan an 120 MB image on high-resolution. Start
> >up your emailer and download your email. Burn a CD.
>
> On a WinDOS box? I thought we were testing floppy formatting, not
> trying to crash the thing.
Yet there are OS's that can stay up under this load and people are
running them right now. Can Win-anything do this? No way!
>
> >Start doing all of these things on Windows anything, adding one at a
> >time. Any bets on when it starts sputtering, slowing down to the
> >point of uselessness, or totally locking up and crashing? U think
> >that scan is gonna look good? U think that MP3 will be smooth. U
> >think u can type full-speed in the WP. What do you think those videos
> >will look and sound like? U think u won't burn a coaster in your CD
> >drive? U think u will be able to play any of those games at all? You
> >are wrong.
> >
> >Or try this. Open up more than 260 programs all at once and run them
> >and work on them at the same time on an ordinary PC system. U think
> >Win-anything can do this?
>
> You've misconstrued my argument, and overstated your case.
Of course I have. My point is that not only can Win-anything not do
the above but it usually cannot format a floppy and do much of
anything else. Certainly it cannot format and play an MP3 and do a
couple of downloads.
--
Bob
Being flamed? Don't know why? Take the Flame Questionnaire(TM)
today!
Why do you think you are being flamed?
[ ] You continued a long, stupid thread
[ ] You started an off-topic thread
[ ] You posted something totally uninteresting
[ ] People don't like your tone of voice
[ ] Other (describe)
[ ] None of the above
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 17:47:01 -0600
On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 13:28:30 +0200, someone claiming to be Paul 'Z'
Ewande wrote:
>Sure does. If you expect to throw blanket statement and get away with you
>are either deluded, or worse beneath the other posters worth.
>
><MAX> Because I said so ! </MAX>
PMFJI, but that's:
<Max> Because I Said So! </Max>
Thank you for your time. Hope that helps.
------------------------------
From: Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Formatting a floppy
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 15:54:42 -0800
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : Start doing all of these things on Windows anything, adding one at a
> : time. Any bets on when it starts sputtering, slowing down to the
> : point of uselessness, or totally locking up and crashing?
>
> In such a case, any operating system would be bogged down
> immensely, simply because the nature of those tasks requires
> much CPU power and RAM.
Amiga and OS/2 can do this. Can Win-anythng? Did not think so...
>
> : that scan is gonna look good? U think that MP3 will be smooth. U
>
> Uh, speed has no effect on "how it looks" in scanning.
> What affects the appearance of a scan is the density
> of the scan, such as 150dpi vs. 600dpi vs. 2400dpi.
Yes but on Win-anything you cannot scan and do anything else.
>
> And an mp3 file's quality is going to be dictated by
> the parameters used in compressing it, not by the
> speed in which it's compressed you moron.
Not at all. Win-anything typically skips when playing MP3's if you
are doing much of anything else.
>
> : think u can type full-speed in the WP. What do you think those videos
> : will look and sound like? U think u won't burn a coaster in your CD
>
> Choppy, as they would under any OS under such strain.
They look good on OS/2, Amiga, and maybe BeOS. Do they look good on
Win-anything? Course not.
>
> : drive? U think u will be able to play any of those games at all? You
> : are wrong.
>
> : Or try this. Open up more than 260 programs all at once and run them
> : and work on them at the same time on an ordinary PC system. U think
> : Win-anything can do this?
>
> : Yet there are OS's that do this all the time, and easily. And u can
> : buy and run them right now.
>
> Really? Please enlighten us, what OS would this be exactly?
OS/2 can run 250-300 programs at once without a lot of problems. I
know a guy who did it. And he did not have a lot of memory or a very
fast chip. Can Win-anything do that? No. And I know the Amiga can
run 110 programs at once on 50 MHZ and 16 MB, without even slowing
much. Can Win-anything do that? No.
>
> BeOS?
BeOS can multitask better than Win-anything.
>
> You are full of shit, plain and simple. There is no way that
> any operating system could handle all of those situations
> simultaneously, unless it was running as efficiently as
> theoretically possible on at least a 4-way SMP box, with
> at least an 80% performance gain on each chip (and if
> you had a clue, you'd know that most SMP systems only
> add 30% to 40% of a performance gain per chip on a
> typical klunking PC.
>
> Not Linux. Not BSD/OS. Not WindowsNT. Nothing can be
> expected to perform flawlessly under those conditions
> on PC hardware.
OS/2 and Amiga OS routinely run under similar loads. Does OS/2 start
swapping like mad? Of course it does! But it stays up!
> Please. Give us a small break from this nonsense.
>
> It's obvious that you have absolutely no idea
> what you're talking about, so please spare this
> group from your idiotic notions, and come back
> when you have a clue.
>
> Twit.
Just speaking from experience, friend. You Win-users are so isolated
you have no idea what some other OS's can do. Windows is not the only
OS out there. You guys need to get out once in a while.
--
Bob
Being flamed? Don't know why? Take the Flame Questionnaire(TM)
today!
Why do you think you are being flamed?
[ ] You continued a long, stupid thread
[ ] You started an off-topic thread
[ ] You posted something totally uninteresting
[ ] People don't like your tone of voice
[ ] Other (describe)
[ ] None of the above
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 18:01:57 -0600
On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 18:39:55 GMT, someone claiming to be T. Max Devlin
wrote:
>Said Roger in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 31 Mar 2001 00:53:42 -0600;
>>On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 04:40:13 GMT, someone claiming to be T. Max Devlin
>>wrote:
>>>Said Roger in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:52:26 -0600;
>>>>On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:36:11 GMT, someone claiming to be T. Max Devlin
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>And made assumptions about the variables that are entirely unsupported,
>>>>>and in fact ridiculous, no doubt. Like my old buddy Roger, who had to
>>>>>replace his video *hardware* to get *IE* to work, and acted as if it was
>>>>>a hardware failure.
>>>>1. Not now, nor never was your buddy
>>>>
>>>>2. Never made such a claim.
>>>Yup, all happened, just like I said. We even reprised the discussion a
>>>couple times over the last year or so. You posted the whole story
>>>yourself, to illustrate why Windows failures can be blamed on
>>>"hardware". You got IE5, and installed it, and your computer crashed,
>>>so you got a new video card, and that "fixed" the "problem".
>>Nope. Never happened. You're confused again -- perhaps it was your
>>imaginary friend that you had such an exchange with?
>You're my imaginary friend, Roger. Actually, it does turn out that it
>was JS/PL.
1. I am not imaginary.
2. So this is an admission that your were (c'mon Max -- you can say
it. Begins WR and ends ONG?)
3. Since this is not the first time I have corrected you on this
topic, you knew or should have known that it was incorrect. You stand
convicted out of your own mouth once again of lying.
>>>>Of course, what can you expect from a person with so much Internet
>>>>experience that he once berated another poster for using his
>>>>postmaster's IP address. Said address being 127.0.01.
>>>No, that's 127.0.0.1, and it is not "his postmaster's IP address".
>>That was rather my point -- you made the claim that it was your PM's
>>IP, and that claim formed the basis for your little rant vs. that
>>poster.
>Look, I really don't see any need to explain it to you again, its
>obvious you're not ever going to be smart enough to understand it. Go
>read a book on TCP/IP, maybe you'll get lucky.
What's to explain (which you never did -- you simply did not
acknowledge my "Could someone please explain the significance of
127.0.0.1 to Max" comment?) If you feel that there are circumstances
which make it less than a complete bonehead mistake to have so ranted,
feel free to present them.
I'm not holding my breath.
>>>>Or that MS had a monopoly on OS before the IBM PC.
>>>Depending on whether you consider a monopoly "successful" at less than
>>>100%. The vast majority of all microcomputers developed in the early
>>>80s used Microsoft's ROM BASIC, largely "successful" because of the same
>>>kind of business strategies they later used with DOS, and now Windows.
>>So perhaps you can list these "vast majority" which used MS-BASIC as
>>the sole OS (or even as a standard feature) along with sales figures
>>to show that they comprise such a majority. Or you can admit that
>>your rhetoric was overblown once again and you got called on it.
>Who said it needs to be a "vast majority"?
Umm. You did: "The vast majority of all microcomputers developed in
the early 80s used Microsoft's ROM BASIC"
>Who said it had to be the sole OS?
So, it is your contention that MS-BASIC was a monopoly in spite of
plenty of competition and in spite of not being the most prevalent OS.
Do tell...
>You haven't even looked into it, have you? You certainly
>don't have any facts to dispute the issue, or I assumed you'd have
>posted them.
I'm not the one that asserted. The burden of proof is on you.
>So, other than pointing out your *complete inability* to
>refute my statement (which is both sufficient and necessary to account
>for observable facts), you're just pissing in the wind, aren't you,
>Roger?
TAOILHTN.
Are you * sure * you're not Joe Bellinger or vice versa?
IOW -- what are * your * facts supporting your claim that MS had a
monopoly on OSes before the IBM PC?
------------------------------
From: "Joseph Ogiba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Linux on Compaq...coming this Summer.
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 00:08:04 GMT
This is the biggest bullshit story I ever heard. There is no demand from the
public for a PC with Linux instead of Windows.You Linux diehards have a bug
up your ass the size of Texas over the word MICROSOFT. If there was a demand
Larry Ellison would start a company selling PC's with your "FREE" OS.Your
just pissed because YOU paid $320.00 for one share of VA Linux and watched
it drop to $3.00 today. Linux is DEAD as a consumer OS and Windows XP is the
nail in the coffin.
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Andy Walker wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >
> > >
> > >Not for those who are looking for something pre-installed from a
> > >mass merchandiser.
> > >
> > >Although Compaq would LOVE to sell you a computer with Linux
> > >pre-installed, they are currently hamstrung by Microsoft's
> > >anti-competetive contracts.
> > >
> > >Microsoft and communism are very similar. Neither one has much
> > >tolerance for the little people doing something different.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I've just read an article about Compaq. Alledgedly by Summer this year
they
> > will supply machines with four flavours of Linux.
> > Should be interesting to see. For those interested, the article is in
the
> > April edition on Linux Format.
> > My guess is that Compaq will do it for purely financial reasons. It must
be
> > at least fifty pounds profit per machine extra after not paying for a
> > Windows OEM licence!
>
> Whattya want to bet the results will be like in three years, eh Jackie?
>
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
> Special Interest Sierra Club,
> Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
>
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
>
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Why can't we just all be friends?
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 00:11:05 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Brandur K. Jacobsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 27 Mar 2001 14:26:01 +0100
<3ac08cc8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"Meaningless! Meaningless!" says the Teacher. "Utterly meaningless!
>Everything is meaningless."
>I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them
>are meaningless, a chasing after the wind.
>Ecclesiastes chapter 1
>
>So what if it's Windows or Linux or whatever?
Dude, lay off the Nietsche or Kant or Plato or whatever. :-)
It's only an advocacy group. :-)
That said ... there are but two requirements that can absolutely
be proven, and those are to survive and to procreate.
Presumably, one can derive an entire subtree of existence from that
with a lot of work. For example, in order to survive and procreate,
in our modern society, there is a medium of exchange (money), [*]
methods of earning it (many), spending it (even more), and
tracking it. Various other things ensue from looking at
societal governance, which, very loosely stated, might be
construed as an answer to the question "How can we all get along
without killing each other?" :-) It's pretty easy to see,
for example, that murdering one's fellow man causes deep suspicion
and anyone that does that, absent a strong counterbalance (e.g.,
fellow man is about to torch a plant full of workers!), would
be ostracized, and, if necessary, executed for the good of society.
Assuming it's clear what is good for society -- but that's fodder
for another day. :-)
A strong desire, which may be considered a derivative of the
second requirement, is to leave one's mark on society. I'd say that
Linus Torvalds has done that, with a lot of help from Richard Stallman
and many many others. Bill Gates has also left his mark; without
him, we might have quite a different world. (I'm not sure if
it would have been better or worse at this time; my suspicions are that
it would have been better, but there are an awful lot of factors that
might have been.)
One might diagram the following, although there are some things missing
(for example, food preparation might need a subclause that indicates
food preparation is required for reduction of bacterial content).
This may also more accurately diagrammed as a directed acyclic graph
rather than a tree.
Survive & Procreate
+ Survive
+ Caloric consumption
+ Acquire Money
+ Acquire useful skills
+ Learn software development
+ Learn API's
+ Hire self out
+ Work and get paid
+ Exchange Money For Food
+ Prepare Food
+ Waste disposal
...
All this IMO, of course -- my claim to philosophical expertise is
one class in college 20 years ago and a bit of random reading. :-)
This is also far less precise than it should be.
>
>_brandur_
>
>
[*] I'm not expert enough to completely explain why money exists,
although I am somewhat knowledgable about the
"three-way barter problem", which isn't solveable without
a common denominator.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 54d:08h:28m actually running Linux.
All hail the Invisible Pink Unicorn (pbuh)!
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' Ewande®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 02:35:52 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP> A whole lot of stuff </SNIP>
> >Sure does. If you expect to throw blanket statement and get away with you
> >are either deluded, or worse beneath the other posters worth.
> >
> ><MAX> Because I said so ! </MAX>
>
> Apparently, you must recognize how weak your argument is.
I do ? Reading minds again ?
<SNIP> Some of the same </SNIP>
> >I like it how you are able to jump from a rhetorical to an absolute sense
> >when it suits your "debating" needs. How do you figure the difference in
the
> >post ? Do you read the mind of the poster ? I ask for entertainement
> >purposes only.
>
> I presume that the author's intent was to communicate a rational
> thought. The rest is easy.
When people throw around blanket statements, you presume that their
intention is to communicate rational thought ?
> >> rhetorical sense. Linux, you see, is not capable of "sometimes" not
> >
> >Ha ha ha ! Good one ! Please point your browser there:
> >
>
>http://www.google.com/search?hl=fr&safe=off&q=%2BLinux+%2B%22problem+with+a
+
> >floppy%22&btnG=Recherche+Google&lr=
> >
> >I believe that those people are imagining things. After all Linux is not
> >capable of sometimes not working, Max said so.
>
> I believe you are imagining things, and these people have not yet
Are you for real ? :)
> discovered what entirely deterministic and predictable behavior results
> in whatever problem they are having.
It becomes funnier by the minute. You really believe what you wrote ? Linux
is the überOS which can never fail ? Why are some people reading the source
code and issue patches to fix bugs, that don't exits according to you ? For
the hell of it ?
> In theory, it is similarly correct to consider Windows deterministic and
> predictable, because it cannot work counter to the laws of physics.
> Unfortunately, it is proprietary, and *very* badly designed (and, yes,
> we presume that because of the results we see, which include [but are
> not categorically identical to] the fault being examined), and so in
> practice, this is not the case.
Heh. If you say so, it then must be true.
> >Absolutes, gotta love them, so easy to shoot down.
> >
> >> working, like proprietary monopoly crapware.
> >
> >So much for a point stated accurately and moderately.You keep desecrating
a
> >product and yet I'm supposed to be the prejudiced one. Am i the only one
> >enjoying the irony ? :)
>
> When on when will I find someone on Usenet smart enough to understand
> Mr. Franklin's words?
Please, share what you know. What do they mean ? That throwing around
blanket statement laced with childish creative naming and crapping on the
object of contention is the preferred way of debating ? Because that' what I
saw you do ? Please, don't be a tease, enlighten me.
> --
> T. Max Devlin
Paul' Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' Ewande®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 02:37:16 +0200
"Roger" <roger@.> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 13:28:30 +0200, someone claiming to be Paul 'Z'
> Ewande wrote:
Damn ! Busted ! :)
> >Sure does. If you expect to throw blanket statement and get away with you
> >are either deluded, or worse beneath the other posters worth.
> >
> ><MAX> Because I said so ! </MAX>
>
> PMFJI, but that's:
Doest that mean Pardon Me For Jumping In ?
> <Max> Because I Said So! </Max>
Oooops, my bad. :)
> Thank you for your time. Hope that helps.
Sure does. Thanks. :)
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB?
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 18:15:19 -0600
Off topic for this thread, but Max has claimed at least two
conversations with you re: a problem with IE which was solved by
replacement of a video card. Since he originally claimed it was me,
in spite of being corrected before (and since it is, after al, Max)
I'm inclined to take his recent version of the fantasy with a huge
grain of salt.
Do you recall the threads he's babbling about?
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 1 Apr 2001 00:22:04 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> Aaron is not advocating that we round up everyone - just those who are
:> the most blatantly and obviously guilty. And, so long as these folks
:> get an *exceedingly* fair trial, and as long as their sentences are
:> somewhat commensurate with their crimes, I am in total agreement with
:> him.
: http://photos.yahoo.com/bc/calvinthedog?d&.flabel=fld4&.src=ph
: Here I am guy. Please send me photos to the FBI, ok? I would just
: love to be on a most-wanted list! And I haven't been on trial in 21
: years! I miss the courtroom, honest!
Sorry to disappoint, but I don't see any evidence of you being a
significant threat to the life, liberty or property of anyone right
now.
If you were to act on your views, that would be a different story.
Joe
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 1 Apr 2001 00:27:08 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Paul Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: If you don't have a viable solution, then you're part of the problem.
There is a great solution. It's called the Constitution. It is the
highest law of the land, and anything contrary to it is null and void.
I'm sworn to defend it, and that is why I oppose those who have
knowingly and actively violated it for their own personal gain.
Most of those who get labeled as "anti-government" actually favor
lawful, Constitutional government. What they oppose is the current
oligarchy masquerading as a democracy, most of whose actions are
obviously and blatantly unlawful. And on that point at least I'm with
them 100%.
Joe
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
