Linux-Advocacy Digest #265, Volume #33 Mon, 2 Apr 01 00:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows "speed" (Barry Manilow)
Re: Communism (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Multitasking ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Multitasking ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Communism (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Communism (T. Max Devlin)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Multitasking (T. Max Devlin)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Arrrrgh! Hoist the Jolly Roger! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Communism (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Communism (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Communism (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Communism (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Treason (was Re: Communism) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Treason (was Re: Communism) (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Windows "speed"
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 20:57:42 -0700
"." wrote:
>
> > There is an illegal, criminal provision in the contract which forbids the
> > library from installing Netscape on any of the boxen.
>
> Do you have the text of this provision available to you?
Sorry. No. It was widely reported, though. When I was there the
other day, I.E. was acting up on a number of boxen, of course.
"Cannot display page", etc. The fellow running the puters was
frantically trying to get it display the page. Nothing worked, of
course. I told the guy to download Netscape and put it on and he
looked at me like I just asked him to have sex with his Mom. This was
clearly "non-doable".
>
They are 600 MHZ 128 MB 2 GB NT4 boxen and they
> > are slow and lumbering like drunken rhinos trying to climb out of a
> > slippery muddy slope. Depressing!
>
> That about sums up all my experiences with NT... generally stable, but slow
> as all hell. Once it finally gets started, it's closer to usable, but it's
> such a dog to get moving.
Yes I agree with you.
>
> > >It flies on a P/200 with 32 MB RAM.
> >
> > Haha. My sysadmin friends say that OS/2 server serves 200 clients on
> > the above configuration while NT will not serve even one. What gives?
>
> Your sysadmin friends are lying, is what gives. NT on that hardware will
> definitely serve at least 4 clients.
Granted you may be right. Still, 200 versus 4 is a rather radical
indictment, is it not? Why are ppl always replacing Warp servers with
NT servers? Sounds like mass insanity to me.
(this was a little before I lost all
> respect for the MCSE qualification).
Hahaha. Yes, what a joke. Have you ever seen the look of confusion
and terror on a typical MCSE's face when faced with this thing called
a command line? LOL.
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:03:48 GMT
Said Scott Erb in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 01 Apr 2001 14:06:29
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
[...]
>Socialism has many forms. Marxian socialism is based on certain beliefs
>about philosophy and science which form a rational (if wrong) ideology.
I'd like to jump in on that, because I think this is where the problem
is, that gets people like Aaron so hung up "hating commies". They do
not believe it is possible for a philosophy to be both rational and
wrong. It would be a shameless rhetorical trick to suggest that this is
because they are quite proud of their ability to be rational, and very
ignorant of true morality. Talking about philosophers make it
difficult, of course, because so many were not "regular language
philosophers", and so the term "true morality" requires, itself, some
definition. But here I don't think it does. The "true morality" I
speak of is simply empathy and sympathy. Most flakes like Aaron are
extremely Randian, often even objectivists, and seem relatively proud of
their lack of empathy or sympathy. For them, even the regular language
phrase "true morality" requires definition.
Anyway, getting away from what was meant as an aside, and not a whole
argument based simply on second-guessing other's morality, which I quite
refuse to do, my point was that I think people have grown so comfortable
on Lockean philosophy, certainly in the United States it approaches
religious fervor, that they convince themselves that Locke didn't
require God to grant all rights and economic systems based on Locke's to
assume a lack of true scarcity.
So unless Aaron believes in a benevolent superior being, he's going to
get hung up on the difference between "rational" and "correct", and
assume the one means the other, and therefore what is "rational" cannot
be "wrong", in any sense of the word. Which, if you conveniently drop
empathy and sympathy out of your moral sphere, is exactly what happens.
Suddenly what is "rational" points to wherever you expect it to point
to, as if it were a compass needle with no invisible magnetic lines to
direct it.
>Rational means that it has premises and core assumptions which are built
>upon to develop the ideology, and which determine what the ideology is.
My private thinking is that Locke's work is best taken as a model, not
an explanation. The real world is more like a dialectic between Hobbes
and Mills. It was all well and good that the Founding Fathers adopted
Locke's framework of "natural rights", but folks like Aaron just turn it
into a religion, simply substituting the word "communist" for "heretic".
>Most modern ideologies are rational in that sense, you can trace their
>basic assumptions and beliefs. Fascism rejects rationality and the use
>of reason as a limitation on human will and spirit, the exact opposite
>argument of socialism. It is an essentially different ideology.
You've got to admit, though, that presenting it like that seems to
understate the practical reality of fascism, and even misconstrue what
is meant in the context, which certainly isn't "the exact opposite" of
socialism. Plus, Aaron's going to get confused reading what you wrote,
and point out that 'communism rejects rationality and limits the human
will, too!'
[...]
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
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: 2 Apr 2001 04:06:55 GMT
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Stephen S. Edwards II
: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: wrote
: on 31 Mar 2001 20:46:00 GMT
: <9a5fm8$qei$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
: >The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: >
: >8<SNIP>8
: >
: >: The Amiga was definitely an impressive machine -- and I still hear rumors
: >: of it coming back. :-) (Maybe it's because Microsoft hasn't ported NT
: >: to it yet...)
: >
: >Sadly, I've been reading about those same rumors since '94.
: Yeah, I know.
: >
: >They never came to fruition, so I wouldn't get my
: >hopes up if I were you. :-(
: I'm not worried about it anymore. Linux is almost as fun now. :-)
: If I get back into the video production market (as if I was even
: in it to begin with!), I'd probably get a mid-grade video MPEG
: encoder package of some sort and slap it on an SMP PC, then write
: my own rendering package or use something like POVRAY.
Go to http://www.linuxlinks.com. Lookup Broadcast2000.
Have fun. *large grin*
------------------------------
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: 2 Apr 2001 04:08:13 GMT
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: > The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: >
: > 8<SNIP>8
: >
: > : The Amiga was definitely an impressive machine -- and I still hear rumors
: > : of it coming back. :-) (Maybe it's because Microsoft hasn't ported NT
: > : to it yet...)
: >
: > Sadly, I've been reading about those same rumors since '94.
: >
: > They never came to fruition, so I wouldn't get my
: > hopes up if I were you. :-(
: http://www.amiga.com/corporate/020601-mcewen.shtml
: We should know in 2 weeks, to be exact.
: This is their last chance to redeem themselves.
I tally this as, what, promise #368 or so?
I really wish they would stop making promises,
and either just deliver a damned machine, or
shut their mouths already. >:-\
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:20 GMT
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 31 Mar 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
[...]
>> Never occurred to you that maybe it was the people who non-government
>> schools who want to control the masses, eh? Not very bright, eh?
>
>Ever notice how the kids who attend non-government K-12 schools are
>so much better educated than their government-school peers....
>even in ghetto neighborhoods.
No.
>why is that.
Because you're a bigot and a flake.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:21 GMT
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 31 Mar 2001
>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.
I would suggest that your authority is convincing evidence that
brainwashing is completely impractical and relatively ineffective.
>Go to Russia and you see the same thing with Lenin. Statues of
>Lenin are still quite easy to find. And he's still spoken of as
>a hero. As if delivering the peasants from their erstwhile
>freedom back into his own slavery cum personality cult was some
>sort of heroic deed on his part.
>
>I think the footage of "statue dismantlings" were for the consumption
>of Western policy makers and so on.
You're a paranoid schizophrenic, so that's not surprising.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:22 GMT
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 31 Mar 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>
>> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 30 Mar 2001
>> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 30 Mar 2001
>> >> >Mathew wrote:
>> >> [...]
>> >> >Having a monopoly is not illegal.
>> >> >
>> >> >Engaging in a pattern of anti-competitive behavior to gain and hold
>> >> >the monopoly *is*.
>> >>
>> >> And since there *is no other way to have a monopoly* in a free-market
>> >> capitalist economy, having a monopoly is evidence of monopolization, and
>> >> is therefore unlawful, if not illegal. This is the reason Congress did
>> >
>> >Close, but not quite.
>> >
>> >Anybody who is the sole supplier of an item manufactured with, or
>> >incorporating, a patent which he holds, is a LEGAL monopolist for
>> >the duration of the patent.
>>
>> This statement has been specifically, absolutely, and clearly refuted by
>> the Supreme Court. No, a patent is not a "license to monopolize". It
>> is simple ownership of "intellectual property". You cannot prevent
>> others from competing, merely from using your patent. And predatory or
>
>Which is a monopoly on all devices made using that patent.
What, you're not allowed to license a patent?
IOW: BZZZZ! Wrong again.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:23 GMT
Said Joseph T. Adams in alt.destroy.microsoft on 1 Apr 2001 00:27:08
>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.
But that probably includes far more anti-communists than it does
communists.
>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%.
To say that our government needs improving (and to echo that we all do,
which is most of the reason for that political need) is one thing; to
say that the government is an "oligarchy masquerading as a democracy" is
going a bit too far, I think. It shows a lack of confidence in the
Constitution itself, to me.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:23 GMT
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 31 Mar 2001
[...]
>No...I am absolutely DEAD SERIOUS.
>
>> You don't like the US, get the f*ck out.
>
>FUCK YOU. I took an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies,
>both foreign and domestic. And right now, the country is filled with
>enemies of the Constitution.
Well, that's YOU, Aaron, so do us all a favor, uh?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:24 GMT
Said Joseph T. Adams in alt.destroy.microsoft on 1 Apr 2001 01:07:54
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Eric Pinnell
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in part:
>
>: On 30 Mar 2001 21:10:23 GMT, "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>:>Actually, according to the U.S. Constitution and federal law, Aaron is
>:>mostly correct.
>:>
>:>If you're a U.S. Citizen, but choose to make war against your own
>:>country, or give aid and comfort to its very numerous enemies (foreign
>:>or domestic), then you're guilty of treason, a capital crime.
>
>: Logically then, Ted turned should be hung. He is after all, giving
>: aid and comfort to an organization that has avowed to destroy the
>: sovereignty of all nations.
>
>I'd be more than happy to see a jury of 12 of his fully informed peers
>make the decision of whether his actions constitute treason. I
>suspect they would agree with us.
>
>What galls me is that we'll more than likely never see him get
>indicted, much less tried. People who are that rich and powerful, in
>our society, always find a way to buy themselves out of any problem
>they might face.
What "Ted" is being indicted here? I think I'd get a chuckle out of
hearing of his treasonous crimes.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Multitasking
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:26 GMT
Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 31 Mar 2001 21:57:22
>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> Contrast this with WinXP's requirements, which are -- what? 128
>> megabytes? To be fair, that includes display subsystem, GUI, a
>> number of servers, and quite probably a few other things such
>> as music players, web browsers, and built-in virus protection.
>
>Point of note:
>
>Windows XP is in beta. The beta requirements are grossly exaggerated
>due to all the debug code which will be compiled out for the release.
Yea, I'll bet. They'll drop the official number to 96 Meg, but nobody
with more than half a brain would dream of running it with less than
128. Pretty much the same story as every previous version.
>Windows 2000 had a beta requirement of 128MB of RAM and 2GB of hard
>disk, even though the release had a requirement of 32-64MB ram
>and 400MB disk space or something similar.
>
>Windows XP is likely to have the exact same or very similar requirements
>as Windows 2000.
And that's direct from the most recent sock puppet briefing, folks, so
you know it's the official line. Probably a fabrication, but an
official one.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:27 GMT
Said The Ghost In The Machine in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 31 Mar
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, T. Max Devlin
[...]
>>That would be an NFS server, Charles. Not a very popular market, I
>>don't think you'd find more than a couple token implementations.
>>Needless to say, Windows doesn't provide the reliability or performance
>>that is necessary to run an NFS server.
[...]
>As for the answer to NT's ability to be an NFS client -- I don't know
>if they're still in business, but Chameleon at one point had something.
>There are probably other vendors as well; my guess is that an X
>Windows server and an NFS client would be an easy bundle for such
>things as Hummingbird's eXceed and XWin32, although at this point
>I'm just guessing.
I'm not. "A couple of token implementations", as I said. I think that
includes Hummingbird, though its possible they only have an NFS client,
like most everybody else. NFS servers on Windows just don't make *any*
sense. MS doesn't want it, because it mitigates their monopoly power,
and nobody else wants it, because Windows makes a crappy server to begin
with, and NFS is no picnic. IOW: it doesn't work well enough to make it
valuable, even if you give it away.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Arrrrgh! Hoist the Jolly Roger!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:27 GMT
Said William Burrow in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 01 Apr 2001
00:43:01 -0000;
>On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 18:39:50 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>You know, every producer is actually like this; they might, if they're
>>lucky, come up with one single real "innovation" in their entire
>>history. The rest is just the normal development of technology.
>
>Then Apple is exceptional?
Yes, I would have to say they are. But not very; most of that was, as I
mentioned, the normal development of technology.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:28 GMT
Said GreyCloud in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 31 Mar 2001 18:21:14
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
[...]
>> And, yes, referendums are proof that the US is a democracy.
>
>Not all states allow referendums. Right now, in Washington State, they
>are arguing that the people who start refs. are causing budgetary
>problems and want to legislate the referendum out of the state
>consitution. Already we've had two big refs. that passed were
>challenged in court and thrown out. So much for the will of the people.
Yes, many times referendums are used by those who wish to thwart the
will of the people. To say that the US is a democracy is not to say
that it is a simple democracy, though, and the courts are considered as
much the will of the people as a vote, so long as votes *can* remain
emotional, and courts *do* remain rational. Even when they are used to
over-rule democratic actions, courts do so with the power of democratic
actions. Sort of a purposeful friction between Lockean and Rousseauian
perspectives.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:29 GMT
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 01 Apr 2001
[...]
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the
> Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.
>
>http://www.nara.gov/exhall/charters/constitution/constitution.html
>US Government, National Archives and Records Administration.
>
>Read it and weep.
And what beyond your own lack of critical thinking skills has convinced
you that a representational democratic (republican) government cannot
allow referendum?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:30 GMT
Said Roger Perkins in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 31 Mar 2001 21:46:57
>Just a hint here, Max. aaron is very good at playing with words. For
>example, he calls people communists AND nazis. He then gets his no doubt
>very small balls in an uproar because communist and socialist are
>interchangeable terms when discussing this topic. Child can't make up his
>mind. Trash him like I did and it's alot easier to have an adult
>conversation here.
Believe me, I don't need anyone to explain the wonders of the deranged
Mr. Kulkis to me. Unfortunately, its the closest thing to an
opportunity to discuss philosophical ideas, countering his extremist
ranting.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.survivalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:32 GMT
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 01 Apr 2001
>Roger Perkins wrote:
>>
>> Max, he has heard this advice before. He thinks communism and nazism are
>> the same.
>
>Not the same...just very, very, very closely related.
>
>If Communism is so opposed to Nazism, then please explain why
>Stalin, via ComIntern, directed the Communists in Germany to vote
>for Hitler.
No. Now please explain why communism is the same as Nazi fascism.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:33 GMT
Said Joseph T. Adams in alt.destroy.microsoft on 1 Apr 2001 14:14:26
[...]
>I don't pretend to be objective because I'm 100% in agreement with him
>regarding all forms of socialism (of either the leftist/Stalinist
>variety, or the rightist/Nazi variety). I believe that my oath
>requires me to do everything in my lawful power to oppose both, at
>least at every point where they conflict with the inalienable and
>God-given rights of every human being to life, liberty, property, and
>due process of law.
I'd like to make a small note, here, about treason. It is NOT treason
to support and encourage "communists", "socialists", or even "Nazis".
Your oath does NOT require you to do ANYTHING to oppose ANY of them.
"THEY" are political abstractions; wisps of philosophy; they cannot harm
you, and "they" cannot be enemies of anybody, because "they" are
abstractions, not forces, not people, and not governments. People who
react the way these military reactionaries do are simply afraid of
philosophy, and I'd suspect, at least, that this indicates they are
mangled egos with only a coincidental similarity to intelligent human
beings.
Grow up, and learn to use abstractions without getting yourself all
confused, kiddies. Perhaps you think I am missing the point, that any
country which is fascist, communist, or socialist is an enemy of the
United States. But the government doesn't seem to agree on that count,
as they've been very friendly with a number of such governments.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 04:08:34 GMT
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 01 Apr 2001
>"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
[...]
>Kinda like that dear old Mr. Ceacescau, and his wife, the equally guilty
>bitch behind the throne...lined up against the wall, and given a good old
>taste of the AK-47, on live TV no less.
>
>
>A couple of similar deaths for the most egregiously traitorous politicians
>in our country would do wonders.
>
[...]
>...as long as that neighbor isn't trying to violate everybody's rights.
You mean like you are, Aaron? Up against the wall!
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
