Linux-Advocacy Digest #320, Volume #33 Tue, 3 Apr 01 14:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Communism (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Democratic Republics (Was: Communism, etc.) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Donovan Rebbechi)
XP = eXPerimental ("2 + 2")
Re: More Microsoft security concerns: Wall Street Journal ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 13:10:59 -0400
"Scott D. Erb" wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" 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....
>
> Given that I oppose powerful government and in fact my biggest criticism of the
> Left is that it too often ignores the danger of centralized power, your question
> is based on a false premise. Since I've made my aversion to powerful government
> clear earlier in this thread, I have to assume that you are also being dishonest
> in making the statement you make.
Tell us how you propose to steal even more from the productive for the
benefit of the lazy and other parasites without more centralized power.
Saying that you oppose centralized power, while supporting every policy
which requires it is....disingenious.
Either that, or you're a fucking dumbass.
Which is it, Scott?
--
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] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: 3 Apr 2001 17:14:56 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 03 Apr 2001 13:06:07 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 23:17:03 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 06:35:13 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 10:29:22 -0800, Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >Id love to see your cites on the Mexican border/Berlin comparison.
>> >> >> >Please provide them. I do not recall ever hearing about the AirForce
>> >> >> >shooting down unarmed civilian aircraft intentionally knowing full well
>> >> >> >that they were unarmed civilian aircraft.i
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I didn't say the airforce killed anyone on the border. It's usually up
>> >> >> to border patrols, or the good citizens of the US.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >You're saying private citizen and law-enforcement, armed with, at
>> >> >best, semi-automatic weapons, are gonna take down a private aircraft
>> >> >flying at over 100 MPH and a few thousand feet of altitude?
>> >>
>> >> Fuck, no.
>> >> You may want to remove the night vision googles while looking at
>> >> your computer, they impair your reading.
>> >
>> >Night vision goggles do NOTHING to impair the view of a computer screen.
>>
>> The ones you bought using a coupon from the back cover of Archie magazine
>> do.
>
>URL?
>JPEGS?
Well, you are the one that buys the mags.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Democratic Republics (Was: Communism, etc.)
Date: 3 Apr 2001 17:15:44 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 03 Apr 2001 13:08:47 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> On 3 Apr 2001 10:52:48 -0500, Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >On 3 Apr 2001 05:35:51 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>On Mon, 02 Apr 2001 21:19:11 -0400, Scott Erb wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>You are free to think so. These are readings being used by thousands of
>> >>>teachers across America every day, these are the readings that are
>> >>>informing the minds of American citizens and tomorrow's leaders (and
>> >>>today's leaders, most of these readings have been around awhile).
>> >>>You're simply out of the loop.
>> >>
>> >>I don't suppose you've heard, but according to Kulkis, these "teachers" are
>> >>part of a nationwide conspiracy on part of the NEA who are working with
>> >>the KGB. (sarcasm alert) And the above observation PROVES it !!!
>> >
>> >Not the mention the fact they they're trying to rob us of all our precious
>> >bodily fluids.
>>
>> They are probably immigrants. As you know, immigrants is just a code word
>> for "invading army", because there is no difference between one and the
>> other.
>
>
>LEGAL immigrants are ok...and by the way, I support INCREASING our
>immigration rates.
You pinko!
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 3 Apr 2001 17:16:25 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 03 Apr 2001 13:05:05 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 01 Apr 2001 01:14:16 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Roger Perkins wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Don't confuse the little dweeb. He wants to set up a dictatorship in this
>> >> country along with Hdlskdjfloser. He sees "anti-government" as
>> >> "anti-whateverI want".
>> >
>> >If I'm so "anti-government", porker, then why am I *IN* the government.
>>
>> You seem to enjoy taking trips paid by taxpayers to foreign countries
>> where you can use shiny toys to kill people.
>
>That's not my decision...see: CONGRESS.
Are you having drafts these days? I thought the US had a volunteer
army.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: 3 Apr 2001 17:16:41 GMT
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 13:19:16 +0200, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
>"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 03 Apr 2001 04:17:30 GMT, Chad Myers wrote:
>> >
>> >"Toby A Inkster Esq" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In our last episode, Andy Walker wrote:
>> >>
>> >> :Linux can't crash at random every five minutes.
>> >>
>> >> It can is you write your own "crash daemon" and run it under root.
>> >
>> >Isn't that what X is? Only, you don't have to run it as root!
>>
>> X runs as root. As for "crash daemon", the only "crashes" I get are
>> during power outages.
>>
>> But you wouldn't know, because you don't use Linux.
>
>It's not exactly running as root, but it has privileged access to hardware.
[root@ruffbruff thesis]# ps ax|grep X
822 ? S 101:15 /etc/X11/X -auth /etc/X11/xdm/authdir/A:0-HoaDMR
(I'm logged into the X session as user, btw)
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "2 + 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: XP = eXPerimental
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 13:23:14 -0400
XP = eXPerimental
It integrates the NT kernal.
But it also integrates a part of .NET.
And that involves some "Java" clone technology.
At least in the hardware abstraction layer, they are starting with a JIT
compiler, instead of a pure emulated VM.
You heard of Java? That's the "DOT-COM PLATFORM. It runs on HYPE. Usually
slowly.
So naturally Microsoft XP has to have some of that. :)
The industry is beginning to go through a major restructuring, the first of
the post dot-com internet era.
And where is petilon? Has he been restructured?
But of course, we have the people with a cause. I guess the whole point of
having the cause in the first place is so reality does not intrude. Until
the old pink slip comes.
Or the discontinued project. Of course, the Java projects will all be saved.
These are the PRODUCTIVE ones, no?
Well, in a future parallel university, where 100% pure Java reigns. There's
just no more money for these future projects in the CURRENT economy.
By the time, the whole mess is over, all these things that took big teams
will be done with some shrink-wrapped software PACKAGED AS A SERVICE.
This is the only way the functionality provided will be affordable. Or else
it won't be done at all.
Wasn't that the whole point of the PC revolution? Allowing users to point
and click where programmers were required before?
"yes," the dot-com promoters would tell the eager investors, "everything is
done in state-of-the-art Java."
"We use nothing but million dollar Sun servers. It takes a lot of power to
properly run Java."
By the time the restructuring is over, the same capability will run on Linux
for $59.95 monthly.
Broke investor: "You mean, this BILLION DOLLAR WEB SITE is now one of 20 on
the same hard disk on server # 273, the 37th box up on the rack?"
Web Farm Admin: "Well, that's all they could afford after the bankruptcy."
"I think the web site was sold at the bankruptcy auction for $1800. It was
just a catalog, a shopping cart and some transaction processing. That's all
included in our monthly ecommerce package for $30 extra montly."
Broke investor: "I put my whole life savings in that company."
2 + 2
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More Microsoft security concerns: Wall Street Journal
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 19:23:26 +0200
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Everett"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2 Apr 2001 18:43:06 -0500, Jon Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>>> > Really now. I would also ask how in the hell you've determined that
>>> > Microsoft has merely implemented some 4.4BSD code in order to get
>>> > Windows2000. Do you have access to the WindowsNT v4.0 and v5.0
>>> > source trees?
>>>
>>> the "strings" command finds embedded strings in ANY file, including
>>> compiled executables and dll files.
>>>
>>> "Copyright (C), Regents of the University of California" strings have
>>> been found in Mafia$oft's DLL files.
>>>
>>> Hope that helps.
>>
>>I don't believe you. How about showing us one?
>>
>>
> Hey Everybody! It's Jon! Hi Jon!
>
> You asked, so here ya go:
>
> Here are some files from a Windows 2000 Professional system along with
> the copyright strings that are contained in them:
>
> C:\WINNT\SYSTEM32\finger.exe
> @(#) Copyright (c) 1980 The Regents of the University of California.
> C:\WINNT\SYSTEM32\nslookup.exe
> @(#) Copyright (c) 1985,1989 Regents of the University of California.
> C:\WINNT\SYSTEM32\rcp.exe
> @(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
> C:\WINNT\SYSTEM32\rsh.exe
> @(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
> C:\WINNT\SYSTEM32\FTP.EXE
> @(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
>
>
Watch out Chad, now he'll start nitpicking and call you a liar because
these are .exe's not .dll's :)
Mart
--
Write in C, write in C,
Write in C, yeah, write in C.
Only wimps use BASIC, Write in C.
http://www.orca.bc.ca/spamalbum/
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 13:23:22 -0400
"Scott D. Erb" wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Actually, it does! Not only that, but in all countries in Europe the term
> "liberal" is used to refer to the pro-business parties who desire less
> government regulation (the FDP in Germany is an example). Thobaben and
> Funderburk, in their book "Political Ideologies" trace how classical liberalism
> moved to "new" liberalism with people like John Stuart Mill and liberal
> reformers recognizing that you need government action to have the type of equal
> opportunity for all that liberalism assumes; that otherwise powerful actors can
Then why do you liberals spend so much time trying to DENY equal opportunity
in your endless quest for equal results (regardless of how much effort
and talent the various subjects put into obtaining the results)?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm?
> use their power to exploit others. The goal of new liberalism was not to create
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yeah, like government bureacrats.
> socialism -- they still believed in the fundamental importance of liberty and
But you assholes absconded with the term anyways.
> the basic idea of the rights of life, liberty and property. American "liberals"
> are, for the most part, in that tradition. In fact, the vast majority of both
So, you admit, then, that leftists who describe themselves as liberals,
are, in fact, frauds.
> democrats and republicans owe their ideological roots to liberalism, it is the
> fundamental American ideology for both parties. The so-called "right" tends
Demoncrooks stand for slavery.
Demoncrooks stand for racism (look at the uneducated product of Demoncrook
run schools in any metropolitan area like Detroit, Boston, LA, Wash. DC, etc.)
> towards more classical liberalism, and the so-called "left" accepts the premises
> of "new" liberalism and has expanded them. Some American "liberals" drift
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The "new liberalism" relies upon the ancient sin of theft.
> towards Social Democracy, but they are the exception in American politics rather
> than the rule.
Name some "American liberals" who don't subscribe to marxism (of which
Social Democracy is just a watered-down version).
>
> > > 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.
>
> I disagree strongly there. American liberalism is not collectivist, compared to
> real Socialism or European Social Democracy, most American liberals tend to be
Translation: American liberalism hasn't been as successful as implementing
collectivism...but they keep trying.
> seen as very individualist. Look at their policies and positions. Take awy the
> more social democratic of American liberals (say Wellstone, Kennedy, Jackson),
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You misspelled "most representative"
> and look at the mainstream of the Democratic party, and you see people who would
> be in conservative or free market parties in Europe.
Big Freaking Deal. It took Napolean stomping all over Europe to even
get a modicum of human rights recognized in Europe.
>
> > 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!
>
> Eigentlich nicht. Again, I'd refer you to the Thobaben and Funderburk book, or
> a book by Leon Baradat called "Political Ideologies" as well. The fact that
> liberalism veered between classical liberals, who dominated early in the 19th
> century in Britain, and an expanse of the new liberalism which emerged mid-19th
> century in Britain doesn't deny the ideological link. The premises of the
> ideology remain the same, even if the policies advanced are very different.
>
The "new liberal" is merely using the good name of classical liberalism
for cover, like a wolf wearing a sheepskin.
> Socialism underwent similar splits. Social Democrats trace their roots back to
> Marx, as do some anarcho-socialists. These groups are totally opposed to the
> kind of totalitarianism of Stalin and the Communists, whose ideas also emerged
> from early socialism.
And yet, as much as the Politburo mouthed indignation over Stalin's
totalitarianism after he died....they never dismantled it.
Why is that?
>
> > > 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.
>
> I rather doubt it. Locke also talked about limits on rights if the exercise of
> those rights denied the rights to others (esp. property rights). Mill and the
> new liberals worked form aspects in Lockean and other early liberal thought.
> Smith recognized that the theory he had was not magical, and that it required a
> culture conducive to capitalism. However, I suspect Marx would be spinning in
> his grave to see his ideas associated with Stalin or Mao. Ideological
> development is complex.
>
> > > 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.
>
> When I teach about political ideologies I make a point to note that Ronald
> Reagan was a liberal. So was Thatcher. I want students to learn the
> distinction between the terminology used by political philosophers and that used
> in every day political jargon. We then look at how the words changed over time,
> what the core assumptions of the ideology are, etc.
>
> > 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.
>
> I doubt you can credit them with that. They helped make the demise of communism
> more peaceful than it could have been, but it was an unworkable sick system that
> was collapsing in on itself anyway. It was doomed to fall, but without the work
> of the leaders of the time, the fall could have been much more deadly and noisey
> than it was!
>
> > > 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).
>
> Most Social Democrats and western Socialists were extremely anti-Communist.
> Kurt Schumacher, a West German who proudly called himself a Socialist labeled
> the East bloc Communists "red painted fascists." The Social Democrats in
> Germany (SPD) split with the Soviet Union in response to the revolution, with
> the Communist party forming in response (KPD). The Social Democrats fought to
> save the Weimar Republic, combating both the Nazis and the KPD in street fights
> and political battles. In the end, the SPD was the only major party wanting to
> keep democracy in Germany, and the only party to vote against the Enabling Act
> giving Hitler complete power. German liberal parties (ideological liberalism)
> and nationalist parties voted to hand over power to Hitler. Trying to tie
> Social Democrats to the evil ideology (yes, evil -- the Soviets had an evil
> empire) is as misguided as trying to claim conservatives are the same as Nazis.
>
> > > 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.
>
> The definition of Liberal Democracy is clear in the books I cited: it is a
> Democratic Republic based on protecting individual rights of life, liberty and
> property, ideological liberalism. That is not a usage I invented, it is from
> those books I cited: Comparative Politics by Charles Hauss, West Publishing;
> European Democracies by Juerg Steiner, Longman Publishers, etc. That isn't even
> a controversy.
>
> > > 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?
>
> Again, note the above: almost all western Socialists despise Communism. I agree
> with Schumacher, they were red painted fascists, nothing more.
>
> Second, if you read the thread I started called "Left Libertarianism," you'd
> recognize that I share with you a profound mistrust of state power. Your error
> is to believe Dana, he's constantly lying and issuing personal attacks that have
> no basis in reality. I ask you to read my ideas and respond to them, and
> believe flames from someone who, if you look at his threads, is known as a
> flamester.
>
> > 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.
>
> Nor have I, which is why I am against powerful government, and believe that the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And yet, you support every sort of policy which REQUIRES a powerful government
for implementation.
Why is that?
> most important aspect of politics today is to hold governments accountable for
> their action. I am on record supporting decentralization of power, openness of
> government, and other actions to make the abuse of power more difficult. Any
> time you centralize power, either in a big corporation or a big government or a
> big Mafia, you get risks. The challenge of politics is to prevent that power
> centralization while still achieving effective governance. The focus, in my
> opinion, must be on ethics.
>
> cheers, scott
> http://violet.umf.maine.edu/~erb/
.edu => can't hack it in the real world.
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
