Linux-Advocacy Digest #253, Volume #33 Sun, 1 Apr 01 13:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism ("billh")
Re: Communism ("billh")
Re: Communism ("billh")
Re: Communism ("billh")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("billh")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("billh")
Re: Multitasking ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: MS patent lawyer on open source (jtnews)
Re: Formatting a floppy ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Microsoft has gone insane (jtnews)
Re: Multitasking ("JS PL")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Roger Perkins")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Roger Perkins")
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ")
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ")
Re: Formatting a floppy ("Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ")
Re: Formatting a floppy ("Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Roger Perkins")
Re: Communism (GunnerŠ)
Re: Communism (GunnerŠ)
Re: Communism (GunnerŠ)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 15:34:22 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> Yes mister no-accomplishments.
So says the "third" enlistment specialist. I held higher enlisted rank in
the ARNG in '81, just one months shy of twenty years ago, KuKuNut.
You have no knowledge of what I have and what I haven't accomplished. We
know of the your lies regarding what you state to have accomplished,
wannabe. You are pathetic.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 15:41:37 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > ...so says the supposed officer who has never even served in a war
zone.
> >
> > Where have I served? When? When have I been shot at? Where? You
haven't
> > a clue,
>
>
> Then why don't you tell us...mr. fort-resort man
Why? I'll tell you I was in command of a company by the time you entered
the service on 15 Sep 89. I'll tell you I was already a Captain for quite
some time when you were promoted to Specialist on 1 Oct 91. Six more months
and you'll have been SPC for ten years. Ain't that special! You aren't in
position to question my accomplishments in the Army, active or ARNG.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 15:49:39 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> As compared to you brilliant non-opinions.
Opinion is all you have. How about some facts, wannabe.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 15:57:12 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > ...so says the supposed officer who has never even served in a war
zone.
> >
> > Where have I served?
>
> You tell us
>
I can tell where you served. Why don't you tell us where I served and when.
KuKuNut entered 890915. Held 16S as an MOS in the Indiana ARNG (Lafayette).
Assigned to HHC 1-125th in 940701, attached to A 1-125th in 950915.
Graduated SINCGARS operator AIT 900420. Has pretended to know what an
infantryman is since being assigned as a commo E4 in an infantry battalion.
Known to those he serves with as "the general". Care for more?
> > When?
>
> See above
>
> > When have I been shot at?
>
> Never.
LOL! Yet you haven't a clue where I've served and when.
>
> > Where?
>
> Nowhere, captain no-patch-on-his-right-shoulder.
This from you, a known liar. Certainly you can do better than that.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 15:59:02 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> Ever been in a war zone Bill?
>
> No?
>
> Didn't think so.
How many months have you drawn hostile fire pay, KuKuNut? I'll guarantee
not as many as me.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 16:00:53 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" .
> >
> > And still not an NCO. What's that tell you.
>
> I never signed up to go to PLDC.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> And by the way, I get a letter EVERY YEAR begging me to go to OCS.
>
> What does that tell YOU?
That your a chicken-shit and that the MI ARNG is desperately short of LTs.
BTW, KuKuNut, EVERYONE meeting minimal standards receives that letter.
That's what it tells me.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Multitasking
Date: 1 Apr 2001 16:01:30 GMT
Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 22:41:27 -0500, JS PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >
: >Speaking of multi-tasking, I read this thread yesterday and conducted a
: >little test on my Win2K system.
: >Ran a search for *.exe - then when the files found were up to 605 I stopped
: >the search. Selected them all and pressed enter. Ended up with 186 open
: >programs without a hitch. I'm pretty sure the rest opened and closed
: >themselves as command line programs. The system is a dual 500 w/224mb ram.
: >Your incredible Win2K multitasking ability may vary.
: >
: This is complete and utter Hogwash. First, if you think this is a valid
: test of multitasking, you need to educate yourself. Next, I did this
I agree. Such a test does not yield anything useful
other than demonstrating that an operating system can
simply have lots of applications resident in RAM.
A valid test would have as many of those applications
actually doing something while they were running, and
then you would have to monitor and record their
performance.
: on my Win2K system too. You forgot to mention that when certain *.exe
: files are executed, a dialog comes up stating that the application
: "can't be run in win32 mode". Launching of all other applications
: BLOCKS ON THIS DIALOG until the 'OK' button is pressed. You call that
: multitasking? Additionally, when closing many of those applications
Really? That seems a bit odd. It's almost as
if the system must halt the launching of new
processes since it cannot allocate memory for
certain other processes. Perhaps this "can't
be run in Win32 mode" condition is a special
case. I seem to recall being able to do
most anything while other requesters have
been activated. For example, when you install
drivers for Matrox display adapters, it automates
the selection of options in various layers of
requester windows. It's actually quite hypnotic. :-)
: that you have opened (like via a logout or shutdown), you will get
: additional BLOCKING on dialogs stating that some applications "need
: more time to complete" and proceeding with the entire logout and/or
: shutdown is suspended until you hit the 'OK' button on the dialog.
Hmmm... that's quite odd. I wouldn't think
that Windows2000 would have such a limitation.
IME, the task manager has never displayed any
kind of sympathy for any application or process.
Just out of curiosity, what sort of hardware are
you testing this on?
------------------------------
From: jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS patent lawyer on open source
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 16:00:42 GMT
Microsoft software isn't waranteed either.
The company has an "option" to fix the program
with updates, but they aren't legally obligated
to update a buggy piece of software. And since
you don't have the source code, you're basically
out of luck if you do run into a bug, unless,
you want to pay an exhorbitant amount for
"customer support".
You're only hope with proprietary software
is to hope and pray that the company sees
that your bug is important enough and
fixes it in some future release.
There is little chance that a big company
serving millions of users will solve one
particular bug just to solve one user's
problem. Usually it takes a crescendo
of hundreds, maybe thousands of users
complaining about the bug before it ever
draws enough attention to be fixed.
This is the inherent flaw in the proprietary
model of developing software. By its very
nature, software can be propagated and
used by the masses and a tremendous amount
of productivity can result. But a reverse
scenario is also true, if millions of
people depend on a piece of software,
and that software breaks, millions of people
lose productivity. If only one company has
the copy of the source, that company IMMEDIATELY
becomes the bottleneck for MILLIONS of users.
And those MILLIONS of users have to WAIT for
ONE company to fix the problem.
In the Internet age, where society is becoming
increasingly dependent on information technology,
it is simply unacceptable for software to break
for any extended period of time and be dependent
on a single company or person for a bug fix.
It is for this reason that I have eliminated all
proprietary software from the critical parts
of my computing infrastructure. I suspect
that many other businesses will be doing the
same.
tom hanlon wrote:
>
> I had the opportunity to hear T. Andrew Culbert yesterday in a public
> IP continuing legal education forum in Seattle.
>
> He is " a Senior Corporate Attorney for Microsoft Corporation and the
> attorney principally responsible for handling ms's patent infringement
> litigation."
>
> This is what he said on open source software.
>
> Its problem is that the software is not warranteed in any way. It is
> distributed without a warrantee.
>
> He really had nothing more to say on the subject.
>
> I guess this may or may not be enough to stir up any kind of
> discussion.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Formatting a floppy
Date: 1 Apr 2001 16:14:49 GMT
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
8<SNIP>8
: I thought I smelled smoke several threads away. :-)
: Sometimes its hard to keep the topic of this thread together.
: My wifes PeeCee (HP) with an HP scanner and software during a scan
: session, is almost unresponsive to a cancel command. You are right
: about the hardware side of things regarding the PC hardware and its
: performance under loading conditions.
: Things just bog down. If I was a rich man I'd probably look into an
Indeed they do. What stuck in my craw was the
way Mr. "Manilow" was claiming that BeOS's
multitasking was "maybe" better than WindowsNT's
and that OS/2 could run hundreds of applications
with absolutely no performance penalties. Anyone
who's ever used PC hardware knows that this is
impossible under any PC operating system, simply
because of the limitations of the hardware.
: Alpha or Sparc III. But I'm not and have to face the realities and
: limitations of what I can afford. I can get a low end sparc for $950
: new, but I'd have to see what it can do for me.
You can get a good SGI Indy used for about $700-$800
as well. Heck, you can sometimes find a 21" 13w3
monitor for about $250. It's a bit cheaper to
invest in older workstations than in newer consumer
lever PC technology these days.
* Holds up a shiny CD with the BSD daemon on it,
and smiles for the camera...
<SHAMELESS PLUG>
And if you don't care for IRIX, or SunOS, you
could always put NetBSD on either one.
</SHAMELESS PLUG>
: In earlier days, on the old venerable VAX 785, we added a graphics
: terminal to it and installed Regis support. That poor old machine
: really slogged down just running one fractal program. But then again we
: only had at most three users logged on. Had to back away from that
And you have to figure that back then, graphics
were anything but a priority for computer systems.
In the 1960's computer graphics, complete with
phong shading, and animated sequences was very
much alive, but people just didn't see any
practical uses for it, so hardware wasn't
really designed with anything but text-based
applications in mind, I gather.
------------------------------
From: jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft has gone insane
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 16:10:46 GMT
They're getting desperate.
Mozilla is getting pretty close
to being a viable substitute for
Internet Explorer.
When this happens, this will eliminate
the need for me to startup windows
just to use a silly web browser.
(Netscape 4.7x crashes too often
with Java applets)
The only reason I need to use
Windows now is to start a web browser
because most sites only support
Internet Explorer.
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> Hey! Just another indication that Microsoft wants to charge
> you for every bit that goes in or out of your computer,
> PDA, cell phone, satellite dish, toaster, and on and on.
>
> Can you say "HailStorm"?
>
> Don't believe me? Read this:
>
> See http://www.internetweek.com/newslead01/lead032901.htm
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Multitasking
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 12:20:04 -0400
"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 22:41:27 -0500, JS PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Speaking of multi-tasking, I read this thread yesterday and conducted a
> >little test on my Win2K system.
> >Ran a search for *.exe - then when the files found were up to 605 I
stopped
> >the search. Selected them all and pressed enter. Ended up with 186 open
> >programs without a hitch. I'm pretty sure the rest opened and closed
> >themselves as command line programs. The system is a dual 500 w/224mb
ram.
> >Your incredible Win2K multitasking ability may vary.
> >
>
> This is complete and utter Hogwash. First, if you think this is a valid
> test of multitasking, you need to educate yourself. Next, I did this
> on my Win2K system too. You forgot to mention that when certain *.exe
> files are executed, a dialog comes up stating that the application
> "can't be run in win32 mode". Launching of all other applications
> BLOCKS ON THIS DIALOG until the 'OK' button is pressed. You call that
> multitasking? Additionally, when closing many of those applications
> that you have opened (like via a logout or shutdown), you will get
> additional BLOCKING on dialogs stating that some applications "need
> more time to complete" and proceeding with the entire logout and/or
> shutdown is suspended until you hit the 'OK' button on the dialog.
>
> Man, get a clue!
I was just doing a variation on what one Barry Manilow suggested in another
thread.
<qoute>
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?
</quote>
Since I have niether the time nor patients to work on 260 apps at once I
thought I'd see if it would open 600 apps while processing a few screenshots
of the event on a photo editor.
------------------------------
From: "Roger Perkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 10:28:34 -0700
Bill, don't waste the bandwidth. This jackass will lie over and over to
make his point. He can't be trusted to wipe his own ass so just plonk him.
He has shown himself to be unworthy.
Roger
AIRBORNE!
"billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:afIx6.20495$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>
> > Ever been in a war zone Bill?
> >
> > No?
> >
> > Didn't think so.
>
> How many months have you drawn hostile fire pay, KuKuNut? I'll guarantee
> not as many as me.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Roger Perkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 10:30:10 -0700
Bill, he's no more a "serving soldier" than my daughter is. Though she's
smarter. He doesn't talk the talk and hasn't a clue about how the real
world works. Just another lying wannabe.
Plonk him.
Roger
AIRBORNE!
"billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:niDx6.14715$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>
> > Yeah, right Perko...I'm so "anti-government" that I'm a currently
serving
> > soldier...going on my 3rd enlistment.
>
> And still not an NCO. What's that tell you.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ" <[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 10:37:35 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >He said so. What more do you want ? You wouldn't expect him to degrade
> >himself by actually substantiating his claims, now would you ?
>
> I said so and nobody has provided any evidence otherwise. So far, we're
> dealing with reputation, and any poster on adm with any integrity will
What's adm ? What's your definition of integrity ? Those who agree with you
because you sh*t on and waste time hating a corporation because it's trendy
?
> tell you that my reputation is far and away superior to either of yours.
It's oh so true. You're known for throwing blanket statements without
substantitaion. How do you think that various people, including me are aware
of:
<MAX> Because I Said So </MAX> ? :)
You're not probably as infamous as Dave Tholen, but with a little more
work...
> Not my fault.
Aw c'mon, at least in a small part.
Then again you still haven't enlightened me on how putting forth
unsubstanciated claims laced with deprecation and creative naming of the
object of contention is stating one's case moderately and accurately.
Be nice, now Max, share what you know, I'm willing to learn what I don't.
> --
> T. Max Devlin
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ" <[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 10:46:09 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> >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.
>
> Like I actually care whether it was you or some other anonymous troller?
So much for accuracy and moderation, wouldn't you think ?
> Ha!
Indeed. And there goes your integrity...
<SNIP> Some more of the same </SNIP>
> >Umm. You did: "The vast majority of all microcomputers developed in
> >the early 80s used Microsoft's ROM BASIC"
>
> The vast majority of models, not the necessarily the vast majority of
> computers. Note your category error.
<MAX> Models number ? </MAX> Don't sweat it by posting contrived handwaving.
It's for entertainment purposes only and to show how you use double
standards.
<SNIP> Yet some more of the same </SNIP>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Subject: Re: Formatting a floppy
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 11:34:41 +0200
"Barry Manilow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips added.
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> 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
Why not ? If sometimes it can format a floppy, I don't see why it couldn't
play an *.mp3 and do things like a download. try to activate UDMA one day.
> couple of downloads.
On your boxes [which sound like poorly set up] maybe, but on mine I easily
formated the floppy, played an *.mp3 and compressed 200Mb worth of files. If
you ever come to Paris, send me a mail, i'll show you.
You should hang out on the hardware enthusiasts forums, they know how to
properly set their Windows boxes up, and see if the trivial things you
mentionned above make Windows choke.
> --
> Bob
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Formatting a floppy
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 11:24:21 +0200
"Barry Manilow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> Not at all. Win-anything typically skips when playing MP3's if you
> are doing much of anything else.
Again this blanket nonsense ? On my Celeron 400, *.mp3 playing takes tops 2%
of my CPU. Try to enable UDMA one day.
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> 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
Again with the blanket statements. how do you know that Win-users don't know
anything else ?
> OS out there. You guys need to get out once in a while.
To use OSes ? Sorry, when i get out it's not to spend in fron of a computer.
Your mileage obviously varies.
> --
> Bob
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: "Roger Perkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 10:32:50 -0700
"Begging" him to go to OCS?? Proves my point. The Army doesn't "beg"
people to go to school and those of us who have actually served know that.
They might inform you of the opportunity. And not going to PLDC?
Uh-huh... he's a liar alright.
Roger
AIRBORNE!
"billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:VgIx6.20498$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" .
> > >
> > > And still not an NCO. What's that tell you.
> >
> > I never signed up to go to PLDC.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > And by the way, I get a letter EVERY YEAR begging me to go to OCS.
> >
> > What does that tell YOU?
>
> That your a chicken-shit and that the MI ARNG is desperately short of LTs.
> BTW, KuKuNut, EVERYONE meeting minimal standards receives that letter.
> That's what it tells me.
>
>
------------------------------
From: GunnerŠ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 09:42:21 -0700
Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>On Sat, 31 Mar 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
>> Mathew wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sat, 31 Mar 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> >
>> > > Mathew wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Chad Everett wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 01:03:09 +1000, Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Gunner Š wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 01:59:15 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> > > > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> >> Cuba has dedicated itself to the principle that, within its means, it
>> > > > > >> >> will try not to kill any human beings due to lack of food, shelter,
>> > > > > >> >> medical care, poor sanitation, etc.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> But they got real good at shooting down Cessnas......
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >I wonder what Cuba would be like if Batista and the Mafia still ruled.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > It would be a lot like Las Vegas, Nevada
>> > > >
>> > > > I heard the Mob is not so much in control of Vegas now.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > Which one of the voices in your head told you that?
>> >
>> > Logic.They control it very much less now than they did in the 60's and 70's.
>> > The Feds want to make sure they get all of their tax money.
>> >
>>
>> Considering that it's an ALL CASH business, perfect for money
>> laundering....how would taxation deter the mob from desiring
>> and maintaining control in Las Vegas?
>
>Tight regulation of the businesses,undercover agents.
>
Oh..so then Mathew..you are advocating a Police State then?
Why am I not surprised.....
Gunner
=========================================================
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write
a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort
the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone,
solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program
a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die
gallantly. Specialization is for insects." Robert Heinlein
------------------------------
From: GunnerŠ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 09:43:20 -0700
Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>On Sat, 31 Mar 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
>> Brian Turner wrote:
>> >
>> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Barry Manilow wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Craig Kelley wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > > > China is practically a capitalist country right now.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > Yes, they are beginning to see the light.
>> > >
>> > > However, the brutal ways of their Communist Revolution and
>> > > subsequent Cultural Revolution are still with them.
>> >
>> > Another "way still with them" is that Mao is still a hero to most Chinese.
>> > A 'National Review' reporter was recently shocked and apalled by this, he
>> > couldn't explain this bizarre situation. It couldn't possibly be that he
>> > had his facts wrong...it had to be that they are brainwashed idiots or
>> > something.
>>
>> Actually, brainwashing is much easier to accomplish than you
>> might think.
>
>The military is quite good at it.
>
Evidently.. so is the DNC....
Gunner
=========================================================
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write
a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort
the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone,
solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program
a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die
gallantly. Specialization is for insects." Robert Heinlein
------------------------------
From: GunnerŠ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,misc.survivalism
Subject: Re: Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 09:45:57 -0700
Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> If Communism and Nazism are fundamentally opposed to each other, then
>> why did Hitler and Stalin freely borrow repressive techniques and
>> population control techniques from each other?
>
>Because if these techniques worked,why not use them?
>The same reason U.S. military strategists study every powerful military
>entity since the Babylonians to Hitler,to Ho Chi Min.
>The same reason why the U.S. kidknapped German scientists during WW11.
Name two.
You are aware that the U.S. did offer immigrant status to a goodly
number of German scientists AFTER the war.. scientists who would other
wise have been tried, convicted and executed for war crimes? Werner
Von Braun comes to mind.
Gunner
=========================================================
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write
a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort
the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone,
solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program
a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die
gallantly. Specialization is for insects." Robert Heinlein
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
