Linux-Advocacy Digest #295, Volume #33 Mon, 2 Apr 01 22:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :) (GreyCloud)
Re: Communism (Gunner ©)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Gunner ©)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Gunner ©)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Gunner ©)
Re: Windows "speed" (GreyCloud)
Re: (newbie, help me!!) How Do I install Ximan gnome on SuSE 7.1 (Brad Sims)
Re: AMD is to Intel as "What OS" is to Windows? (none)
Re: Windows "speed" (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Windows "speed" (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Mathew)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. ("Dana")
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. ("Dana")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :)
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 18:38:45 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Barry Manilow in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 01 Apr 2001 23:03:01
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >>
> >> Said Stephen S. Edwards II in alt.destroy.microsoft on 2 Apr 2001
> >> >Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> >
> >> >BTW, for a person who hates Microsoft software
> >> >so much, you sure don't seem to have much of
> >> >a problem using Windows98 and Netscape. Don't
> >> >try to deny it... the info's in your headers.
> >
> >I do have a problem using Windows98 Stephen. It gives me problems all
> >the time. :(
> >
> >I didn't say I hated MS SW. I am just pointing out that it is often
> >rather inferior to other SW on the market. MS may have some decent
> >SW. My main complaint about MS is the corporation, not the quality of
> >the products. I will leave that for folks like Max to comment on.
> >:) Like most folks, I am more or less forced to use Windows. There
> >are some apps I really really like that only run on Windows. For
> >instance: Yahoo Messenger and AIM. As another example: voice
> >chatting. I also hope to get into some videoconferencing with a
> >webcam if I can. Also, I can play just about any movie file on the
> >Internet with Win98 (Media Player, Quicktime, and Real Player) and I
> >can listen to Real Player audio. I cannot do any of this on my other
> >OS here. Also, the subwoofers on my speakers only have Windows
> >drivers (!!!!!!???). Drivers for speakers??!!
> >
> >Didn't you know that the world is full of folks like me, who hate MS
> >and maybe even hate MS SW but feel they are forced to use it? That is
> >why so many people are so angry, Stephen. People feel they do not
> >have a choice about Windows. They are forced to use a product they
> >hate by a corporation they hate. And that is infuriating, like being
> >forced to live with/work for/sleep with your worst enemy. Many, many
> >users of MS SW hate MS and hate various MS apps. I meet them all the
> >time. Such sentiments are very common nowadays.
> >
> >I am also spending a lot of time in Windows trying to learn as much as
> >I can about the OS. That is because I make some money as a consultant
> >tutoring Windows users and fixing Windows problems. Therefore it
> >behooves me to know the OS inside out.
>
> That's a bit problematic, though, Bob, seeing as you can only possibly
> know Windows, it being proprietary as well as monopoly crapware, from
> the outside. Not that this does anything but increase the value of
> people that know anything about it at all. Still, you'd make more money
> learning Unix, or even Linux.
>
> --
Yes, he would have a better chance. Our linux group has been approached
many times looking for programmers to work for them.
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
--
V
------------------------------
From: Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 17:43:43 -0700
On Mon, 02 Apr 2001 18:31:25 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>>>Oh..so then Mathew..you are advocating a Police State then?
>>>
>>>In a casino? Hell yes! When you pay for a hooker, you should get your
>>>money's worth, and when you lose money gambling, you want to be sure
>>>your cluelessness doesn't end up supporting the mob. Unless you're not
>>>thinking very hard.
>>
>>I was just questioning your evident mindset carried out to the logical
>>conclusion, based on many of your posts. You seem quite in love with
>>the State as the end all and be all.
>
>Whoops, sorry. My fault, I jumped into the middle of a conversation.
>I'm not Mathew.
>
>However, I don't see why regulation of gambling casinos leads to the
>"logical conclusion" of an over-all Police State, so I don't believe
>your comment is true.
>
If you had been following Mathews other postings..you would understand.
You simply came in, in the middle of a very involved movie.
Gunner
--
"Confronting Liberals with the facts of reality is very much akin to
clubbing baby seals. It gets boring after a while, but because Liberals are
so stupid it is easy work." Steven M. Barry
------------------------------
From: Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 17:43:44 -0700
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001 14:01:02 -0800, "Dana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>
>> I wonder how Scott Erb would feel if he gets his wish of an all-powerful
>> government, and along the way, he gets carted off to some gulag....
>
>It would be poetic justice.
>It is not that Erb is ignorant, he is very dishonest. And to think he is
>teaching this to his students.
HE"S a TEACHER? Lord love a duck. No wonder the SAT scores are being
lowered. No wonder the educational system in this country is floundering
and turning out kids who cannot read, nor think, nor function.
Scott would be a poster child for home schooling.
Gunner
--
"Confronting Liberals with the facts of reality is very much akin to
clubbing baby seals. It gets boring after a while, but because Liberals are
so stupid it is easy work." Steven M. Barry
------------------------------
From: Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 17:43:45 -0700
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001 13:16:33 -0400, "Mysterion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> 1) my gun is government issued, therefore 100% legal, by definition.
>>
>> 2) *I* will be one of those sent out to "get the guns"
>>
>> Hope that helps.
>
>And you would follow an illegal order like that?
>
>>
>> When *we* come search YOUR house for illegal weapons, so as to implement
>> *YOUR* gun control laws....take care to remain silent when we urinate in
>> your living room, you communist prick. Otherwise, a little scuffle
>> might break out.....and when you feel the horrible pain as a couple of
>> bullets enter your body, shattering the very cells of your body tissues
>> before it fragments into 5 pieces careening through your body, tearing
>> open any blood vessels they encounter...
>>
>> Just remember...it was YOU who wanted the government to come and
>> invade every citizen's home.....and the inquest will find that you
>> were putting up illegal resistance, and we will be cleared of all
>> wrongful death charges.
>>
>> After all, that's how it is in a police state.
>
>Are you sure you want this to be your publically stated position on the
>matter?
>
>I just cleaned up my harddrive, so I'm not certain, but I thought
>sliverchimp was the shithead here, not you.
>
>But if you advocate an abuse of power such as you just described, I'm pretty
>sure we can find enough rope for you too.
>
>Good grief, aren't there any right thinking people left in America?
Ah...he was using poetic license and using it as an example, not
advocating such an action. He was taking a bit of delight in the imagery
of the irony of doing such a thing. And I was enjoying it as well.
Chill buddy.
Gunner
--
"Confronting Liberals with the facts of reality is very much akin to
clubbing baby seals. It gets boring after a while, but because Liberals are
so stupid it is easy work." Steven M. Barry
------------------------------
From: Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 17:43:46 -0700
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001 18:55:14 GMT, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> You have repeatedly threatened to kill people for their political
> >> beliefs. That is not protecting their Constitutional Rights.
> >>
>
> Aaron> No, I have not.
>
>Yes you have. You have said that people should be killed for
>merely being democrats.
Given the mindset of the Dems as a whole, and their repeated attempts to
defeat the protections of the Constitution.. a good case could be made
for Self Defense in terminating with extreme prejudice such a group of
people. Sorta like putting down a rabid dog. They are dangerous and
sooner or later, they will bite someone. Its not their fault..its just
the way they are. Mindless, ignorant, driven by their emotions rather
than logic and common sense. Very much like a rapid dog.
Gunner
--
"Confronting Liberals with the facts of reality is very much akin to
clubbing baby seals. It gets boring after a while, but because Liberals are
so stupid it is easy work." Steven M. Barry
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows "speed"
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 18:42:36 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > MH wrote:
> > >>
> > > I won't argue that some of it is indeed 'crapware', and I'm not a MS
> > > apologist by any means. But I.E. 6 that's in Whistler Beta 2 is an
> Internet
> > > experience that makes anything under Linux pale in comparison. I know.
> I'm
> > > running it. --security issues aside (-:
> >
> > How so? What does it give you that IE 5 and Linux with, what Netscape,
> > don't?
>
> I would like to know that too.
> Although, comparing IE (any version above 4) to Linux + Netscape isn't very
> fair, Netscape (especially -6 version) can't hold a candle to IE.
> Try Linux with other some other browser.
That is very true. I loaded Nutscrape 6 for solaris x86 and it was
extremely buggy and took forever to load. I tossed it.
------------------------------
From: Brad Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: (newbie, help me!!) How Do I install Ximan gnome on SuSE 7.1
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 00:52:37 GMT
Thanks for the help
------------------------------
From: none <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: AMD is to Intel as "What OS" is to Windows?
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 21:19:46 -0400
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 01:19:01 +1000, "Cat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>I was considering the reasons for windows dominance of the OS market and the huge
>problems of
>getting developers for Linux, Mac etc. Linux is a solution to a different problem
>that just
>happens to have been successful in some desktop areas. It's a port of Unix to a Intel
>box pure
>and simple. The Mac OS developed before and simultaneously with windows platform and
>so it
>fundamentally different to it.
> I was wondering if anyone has ever considered doing to the OS market what AMD did
>to the
>chip market. Why not engineer an OS from scratch with the objective of being as close
>to the
>windows platform as possible for application development? You could make it open
>source and
>free and include Java and other cross platform API in all distributions.
> It would certainly be a big investment but their would still be enough money in
>the
>coffers of companies like Sun and IBM to do it.
And what would that accomplish exactly? Bottom line is, it would
never be absolutely, exactly, like the Real Thing (ie. "Microsoft
Windows") so most people wouldn't even bother. The cost of the OS is
a tiny fraction of an overall system.
> If I could run a free OS that allowed me to run virtually all of the software
>that runs on
>windows I would even think about paying for windows.
huh?
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows "speed"
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 01:28:14 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, David Rheaume
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 02 Apr 2001 00:11:50 GMT
<atPx6.658$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>I'm sorry, but where do you purchase your crack? NT4 absolutely *flies* on
>a P3/600. It flies on a P/200 with 32 MB RAM.
It might depend on the services running. My NT4 box has a memory
footprint of about 75-80 megabytes sitting idle. However, there are
a lot of services running, and a few things installed (RealPlay
uses 4M of memory, for instance; there's also a virus shielder).
As of right now, it's using up 95M -- and that's after I've closed all
other windows. If I log out, and log back in, it is still using 89M.
If I bounce it (shutdown/reboot cycle), it comes back with 82M,
which seems to be the best I can do with this particular system.
(This is a P3/550, BTW, with 192M.)
>
>And if you install Win2000 on a P3/600, not only will it outperform Win98 &
>Solaris, it'll also boot IP throughput by about 30% over any competing OS.
Well, almost anything can beat Solaris on an x86 :-). Unless Sun is
still supporting Solaris x86 through Solaris 2.8 -- and in that case,
I don't know.
>
>Anyone who has gotten poor performance from either NT or Win2000 on a P3/600
>is suffering from one of the two following reasons:
>
>1. Some component(s) of the hardware platform is not HCL compliant.
>2. The installer/administrator is horribly ignorant of the OS and has
>misconfigured it far outside the reasonable expectations.
>
>Don't let your ignorance or the ignorance of other convince you that Windows
>(the NT kernel) is unreliable.
It's not, actually; the NT kernel is very reliable. Some of the
software surrounding it, however, has demonstrable bugs. :-)
Outlook, in particular.
>
>"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Barry Manilow wrote:
>> >
>> > GreyCloud wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Barry Manilow wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > "T. Mx Devlin" wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > NT is
>> > > > > certainly faster, and better able to handle I/O and multi-tasking.
>> > > >
>> > > > I believe it has been shown over and over that NT is about 20%
>slower
>> > > > than Win 98, which was 20% slower to Win95. WinME has been shown to
>> > > > be 10% slower than Win98. Win2K is the slowest of all. A friend
>has
>> > > > it on a 700 MHZ and it is so slow it is depressing. I just got thru
>> > > > using NT on a 600 MHZ with 128 MB and it was quite slow. Like a
>> > > > lumbering beast.
>> > > > --
>> > > > 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
>> > >
>> > > Hello Barry.
>> >
>> > Grey Cloud! Wassup my man? LTNS. :)
>> >
>>
>> Been doing medical runs for an Alzheimers facility and med conferencing
>> all day long.
>> And I'm still up.
>>
>>
>> > That's about what I've read in the microsoft performance
>> > > ng.
>> > > It just keeps getting slower by each release. Some say Solaris is
>slow,
>> > > but on my machine as compared to win98, its a lot faster than win98.
>> > >
>> > Yes it used to be, "Boot Windows, get a cup of coffee". But if this
>> > trend keeps going, it'll be, "Boot Windows, go to Colombia."
>> > --
>>
>> From a hardware perspective it'll probably take a Pentium IV to boot XP
>> by the way the past trends have been.
>>
>>
>> > 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
>>
>> --
>> V
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 56d:10h:35m actually running Linux.
Yes, uptime & wall clock aren't in synch; I don't know why.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 56d:10h:35m actually running Linux.
No electrons were harmed during this message.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Windows "speed"
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 01:30:57 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Peter Köhlmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 2 Apr 2001 00:03:55 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Chad Myers wrote:
>>
>> NT is far faster for general usage and multitasking than the Win9x
>> line. It's far faster at data transfer including network. It's
>> far faster at just about everything except for certain games written
>> especially for the Win9x line (Quake3 comes to mind).
>>
>
>Chad, you´re lying again. I *do* have Win98 and WinNT4 (SP6).
>NT4 runs much more slower using 2 Processors on a dual-machine
>than Win98 using just one. NT just ran like molasses, The same machine
>running Warp5 (not Warp4) using both processors ran rings around NT.
>
>NT *is* dog-slow.
Just out of curiosity: how much RAM? If you've got 32meg, it's
going to be a chihuahua dragging a 16-ton weight. :-)
If you've got 64meg, it will probably be a basset hound.
128meg and up, it runs -- although I'm not sure if it will
ever catch up to a greyhound. :-)
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random breed here
EAC code #191 57d:12h:02m actually running Linux.
This space for rent.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
From: Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 11:38:57 +1000
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001 d'geezer@d'geezer.net wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Apr 2001 14:00:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (silverback) wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 02 Apr 2001 08:44:35 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Scott Erb wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I couldn't believe the sudden torrent of fascist like threats and
> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>
> >>Spot the character assassination.
> >>
> >>
> >>First of all, Fascism is a form of socialism. By now, it should be
> >
> >wrong clyde. Fascism is the polar opposite of socialism. Fascism has
> >always been a top down revolution to protect the interest of the rich
> >corporate owners. The fact that the fascist supporters are from the
> >top tier of society is enough to dispense with yer silly nonsense.
>
> Oh Yes, Hitler came from the ranks of the aristocracy, his father was just a local
> minor government employee as a hobby. As was his mother of course.
>
> I understand Mousellini was also from the aristocracy.
>
> No dimbulb, fascism is socialism from the top down that is the only difference. I
> preempts the wealth as a first order of business, controls, one way or another,
> the capital goods of a country...the source for production of wealth, then runs
> the entire operation with a promise that there will be law and order in the best
> interests of the state....the state dim bulb, the state.
Wrong.Fascism is foremost always a dictatorship,socialism,or true
socialism is an elected form of govt. Communism is not true socialism
>
> >
> >>very very very clear that I am utterly opposed to all forms of socialism,
> >>as that is merely a trendy word for government-mandated slavery.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> bravado. Apparently the guy does not like being shown that he is wrong
> >>> in his world view -- a view which seems based on his own whims, never
> >>
> >>No...what I don't like are closet-wannabe-dictators like you, who piss
> >>on the Constitution, promote worker-enslaving taxation schemes, and then
> >>want to parade around as if you are some sort of liberator.
> >>
> >
> >sorry fools liberals support progressive taxation.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> supported or substantiated in any way. He did prove to me in this post
> >>> that he isn't worth being taken seriously. It takes all kinds, I
> >>> guess.
> >>
> >>Fortunately, the vast majority of those who keep and issue the automatic
> >>weapons in this country agree with me.
> >>
> >>heheheheheh
> >
> >and we'll be coming for that illegal gun.
>
> Yes. Of course you will. We are quite aware of that. Getting it is yet another
> problem for you in your grand fascist socialism scheme. Please lead the
> confiscation squad.
>
> d'geezer
>
>
> "Anyone who wants to get rid of all guns, thinks that the earth should
> be ruled by large,strong men with swords and clubs. I think we
> already tried that. It was called the Dark Ages."
>
> Christopher Morton, Tue, 27 Mar 2001
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Dana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 17:45:42 -0800
Alex Chaihorsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ab35s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erb,
>
> You have to be honest. We know you have problems with honesty.
> But "Is" is "Is".
> In the middle of the discussion you suddenly remembered that the original
> meaning of Liberalism, which has nothing to do with contemporary
Liberalism.
> Smart move. But may be it is me, who is dishonest here? let the readers
> decide.
> As you know, words, do not really mean anything on its own. Like many
words
> that describe groups and events on the political landscape, "Liberalism"
> means different things at different times.
> Liberalism in its original 18th century British form sought individual
> liberties and was opposed to the growing power of the governments. The
> American Constitution is the crescendo of Western Liberalism ideology.
> Contemporary liberalism has nothing to do with it. Actually, it is almost
> the exact opposite: - a collectivist ideology. But do not take my word for
> it.
> The Encyclopedia Britannica (1998 edition) defines the relation between
the
> two the best:
> "The expansion of government power and responsibility sought by liberals
> today is clearly opposed to the contraction of government power and
> responsibility sought by liberals yesterday."
> Please, everyone, re-read this passage again! Da ist der Hund begraben!
>
> Two most famous founders of liberalism, John Locke (1632-1704), the
> philosopher of individual liberty and Adam Smith (1723?-1790), the author
of
> classical liberal laissez-faire economic theory are spinning in their
graves
> "listening" to what became of their ideology today.
> In modern time, it was Margaret Thatcher, who represented classic
liberalism
> most eloquently. She, President Ronald Reagan and to some extent Secretary
> General Gorbachev, were the most recent champions of the liberal cause in
> its original form. I bow in deep respect to these noble giants of
> liberalism, to who we owe our recent victories over the monster of the
world
> Communism.
> That has nothing to do with socialists and communists that have stolen the
> word (as they always do, because they have to distance themselves from the
> horrors of their original ideology).
> So, Dana is right, and if you claim that Liberal Democracy definition
today
> has retain the meaning of Liberalism of the 18th century, you have to
become
> small government, no free lunch, individualist, which you are obviously
NOT.
>
> But we would like you to be that. What would it take for you to abandon
> your socialist agenda? Yet another tens of millions of tortured and killed
> by Communist NKVD-KGB? More artificial hunger like in 1920-ies in Ukraine
> that caused the biggest outbreak of documented cannibalism known to
men?More
> dead bodies than you already had in Cambodia?
> I remember how "Comrade Pol Pot" was marching down the hall of the Palace
of
> Communism in Moscow during XXIV World Communist Congress. How General
> Secretary Of the Communist Party of USA - Guss Hall (we called him "Gas
> Hall") was standing next to him, apploading. Cambodia was in the middle of
> the its carnage at the time, but American Communists an Socialist were
> there, in Moscow, applauding the butcher.
> You hope that we forgot. No, Erb. Americans forgot, kind souls that they
> are, we didn't.
>
> Alex Chaihorsky
> Reno, NV
Not all Americans forgot, which is why we expose people like Erb.
>
>
> "Scott Erb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > Dana wrote:
> > >
> > > No Erb, you are the one that is wrong. We are a constitutional
republic.
> We
> > > are not a liberal democracy, that form of socialism
> >
> > No, you're wrong. Liberal Democracy means a Democratic Republic based
> > on liberal principles. Ideological liberalism is a belief in limited
> > government and a claim that humans have the inherent right of life,
> > liberty and property, based on the work of among others, John Locke.
> > Liberalism is an ideological opponent of socialism.
> >
> > Classical liberalism saw a very, very limited government (Milton
> > Friedman considers himself a classical liberal), "new" liberalism
> > associated with developments in Britain and thinkers like John Stuart
> > Mill argues that to have real liberty and equal opportunity the state
> > must institute some kind of social welfare programs. Both are at base
> > ideologically liberal, socialism is something else.
> >
> > > is found in Europe in
> > > countries like Germany. And our federalism is not Germany's
>federalism.
> >
> > Germany in some ways has a stronger federalism than ours, their states
> > choose who serves in their upper house, much like the US Senate was
> > chosen before direct popular vote to the Senate was ratified.
> >
> > Dana, your ignorance of the basics here shows that perhaps you need to
> > do some reading on this. I'll later on post a set of books you could
> > start with; at this point, you are in over your head.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Dana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 17:47:01 -0800
Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2001 14:01:02 -0800, "Dana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> I wonder how Scott Erb would feel if he gets his wish of an
all-powerful
> >> government, and along the way, he gets carted off to some gulag....
> >
> >It would be poetic justice.
> >It is not that Erb is ignorant, he is very dishonest. And to think he is
> >teaching this to his students.
>
> HE"S a TEACHER? Lord love a duck. No wonder the SAT scores are being
> lowered. No wonder the educational system in this country is floundering
> and turning out kids who cannot read, nor think, nor function.
>
> Scott would be a poster child for home schooling.
>
> Gunner
It is worse than that. He is supposed to be a university professor.
>
> --
> "Confronting Liberals with the facts of reality is very much akin to
> clubbing baby seals. It gets boring after a while, but because Liberals
are
> so stupid it is easy work." Steven M. Barry
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
