Linux-Advocacy Digest #877, Volume #33 Tue, 24 Apr 01 14:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product (Chad Everett)
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product (Chad Everett)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (Chad Everett)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (Chad Everett)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Gunner ©)
Re: Communism (Gunner ©)
Re: Communism (Gunner ©)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("billh")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Chad Everett)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (WesTralia)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (Roberto Alsina)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Chad Everett)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 24 Apr 2001 11:17:08 -0500
On 24 Apr 2001 09:13:55 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> > 2) Do a "chgrp cdrom /dev/{sr,sg}0; chmod 0660 /dev/{sr,sg}0", then make
>> > your CD writing program setgid. This way, the program does not gain root
>> > permissions at any time during its execution.
>>
>> You can do the same in Win2k setting the execute permissions to the
>> device drivers to only administrators and then giving permission to
>> only one user or groups of users, then giving them the ability to
>> start and stop devices. They can only then start the devices they
>> have permissions to.
>
>That's not the same thing at all. In your case, you're giving the
>user all the rights to do anything at all to the system (including
>stopping the SCSI device). Using specialized groups for device access
>and sgid programs under UNIX allows you to do exactly one thing only,
>using only one point of system entry.
>
>> > 3) Do the same chgrp/chmod, then edit /etc/login.defs so that users who
>> log
>> > in at the console automatically gain access to the cdrom group.
>>
>> This would require some scripting to work under Win2k, but you could do it
>> as well.
>
>Sure, just add the logged in user to the Administrators group...
>
>Apart from all this, these programs (OmniPage OCR, Adaptec Easy CD,
>etc.) say IN THEIR INSTRUCTIONS that you MUST run them as the
>Administrator user. The people that buy these programs will follow
>those instructions, and odds are that they'll ALWAYS login as the
>Administrator so as not to be bothered.
>
>_That_ is going to obviate the entire NT security system that
>Microsoft has so painstakenly built over the last 10 years; they need
>to do something about it (ie, they need to Rip Off Apple Yet Again and
>take a lesson from MacOS X where when a normal users attempts to
>perform a privileged task, the root password is asked for).
>
Bingo buddy! Exactly correct. Windows 2K Pro is crappy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 24 Apr 2001 11:23:48 -0500
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 04:50:14 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >And how is that any different from opening up Linux to allow normal users
>to
>> >do priviledged activities?
>>
>> What he suggested is patently WRONG:
>>
>> Trouble is what you suggested doesn't work worth beans on W2K Pro.
>> Why don't you actually try it before you suggest it.
>>
>> First: Easy CD Creator and NERO both tell you that only Administrator
>> can write to CDs on Windows 2000 Pro. Whether I've given users
>> permission to load and unload device drivers or not.
>
>Funny, I'm burning a CD as we speak under a non-administrator account using
>the method I mentioned using Nero. I don't have EZCD Creator so I can't
>test that.
>
You're lying. I also have NERO 5.0. I tried this yesterday. NERO brings
up a dialog explicitely telling you that only administrators on Windows
2000 can write to CD/RW drives.
>> Second: I don't want users to be able to load and unload any device
>> driver that they want. I want to only give them access to the CD/RW
>> drive. I'm sure you can see the difference.
>
>Then only give them permissions to for it. That's what ACL's are for.
>Remove execute access.
>
>> Bottom line: no solution on Windows 2K Pro. Users can't use CD/RW
>> drives to create CDs.
>
>And you forgot again about running the program as adminstrator from your
>account.
>
>> Try it yourself and you'll see.
>
>I am.
>
You're lying.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 24 Apr 2001 11:26:11 -0500
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:38:44 +0100, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>According to the definition of the suffix, sexist does not necessarily
>>>specify a direction of the prejudice.
>>>
>>>So, according to my two dictionaries, this feminist is not correct in
>>>general, since at best there is no firm consensus on the meaning.
>>>
>> Yeah, but you need to use some real dictionaries.
>
>Care to explain how the Longman English dictionary and the Collins
>dictionary are not real dictionaries? Mabey I'll check in the Oxford
>English Dictionary (full length verson), or is that not a proper English
>dictionary either?
>
The Oxford English Dictionary will be just fine.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 24 Apr 2001 11:32:40 -0500
On 24 Apr 2001 15:53:40 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 24 Apr 2001 14:59:48 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On 24 Apr 2001 12:58:57 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>You said women are better off when they are not allowed to walk in
>>>>>the street without male company.
>>>>>
>>>>>That's pretty hateful.
>>>>
>>>>Prehaps as hateful as people like you who would like to see women
>>>>walk along in the street with no pratical way to protect themselves.
>>>
>>>I want women to be able to walk alone if they want to. It seems that
>>>you only want freedom for yourself. Or you want to be forbidden from
>>>walking alone, too? A gang could harm you.
>>
>>Just as I said.
>
>Just as you said what?
>
>>People like you would like to see woman walk alone
>>with no practical way to protect themselves.
>
>Maybe it's too hard for you, so I will use small words.
>I want women to walk how they want to walk. Women want walk alone?
>Woman walks alone. Woman wants escort? Woman gets escort.
>
>Woman wants to walk alone can not? Bad.
>Woman wants not to walk alone can not? Bad.
>
>Maybe this time you'll understand this simple concept.
>
I know that logical thinking is difficult for you, so I will try
to be clear:
It can be dangrous for women to walk alone. Women walking alone armed
with guns can defend themselves. People like you would like to rob
women of their ability to defend themselves. People like you would like to
see women walk alone with no practical way to protect themselves.
>> Women with guns are a good thing. Women willing to use guns are
>> even a better thing.
>
>Now that's a very strange fetichism.
>
>Roberto Alsina
Typical sexist remark.
------------------------------
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: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:55:54 -0700
On 24 Apr 2001 12:57:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:12:05 -0700, Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 23 Apr 2001 19:27:50 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>The government should protect people from danger.
>>>Isn't that why people should pay for the army?
>>
>>Wrong. No one is going to pay to give you your own guardian angel. We
>>pay for the military to keep other nations from destroying our nation.
>
>Is that not a danger? Is that not protection?
Sure is, to the nation. However..courts have held consistently, that the
State has no obligation to protect the Individual. One is responsible
for ones self protection. If you feel that the State should keep you
safe in a padded room.. I agree whole heartedly with you.
>
>>Period. Now if you feel someone should keep you from danger.... you
>>should seek a mental health professional immediately.
>
>You need help.
Thanks, I have all the self protection help I need.. seat belts, fire
extinguisher, good locks, a CCW permit and the hardware to go with it...
Gunner
""The greatest evil is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted)
in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices...like the
bureaucracy of a police state or a thoroughly nasty business concern."
C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
------------------------------
From: Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:55:55 -0700
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 13:19:40 GMT, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>That is hyperbole. But even if true, would not justify his call to
>kill democrats in general.
>
>He is a proven liar, a cowardly forger, and if you value your personal
>credibility you would stop defending him.
>
Aaron can defend himself, I do however often agree with his concepts and
ideas, and I defend those on occasion.
You really need to work on something else besides the :lier/forger:
thingy... you have beat that horse to death, and you now sound simply
shrill and simple minded. I dont know if he did or didnt, and would be
surprised if he had, but I really dont care about the personal pissing
contest the two of you have going on between you. I find you more and
more using it as a pretext to avoid refuting his ideas..which leads me
to believe that he is winning the logic/info debate and you are slipping
into LaVoys Corralary.
Spend more time on the subject, and less on whimpering.
Gunner
""The greatest evil is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted)
in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices...like the
bureaucracy of a police state or a thoroughly nasty business concern."
C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
------------------------------
From: Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:55:56 -0700
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 07:41:11 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>theRadical wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:12:14 -0700, Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:31:15 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >ANYBODY who seeks to enslave others sacrifices any claim to his own life.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >Hope that helps.
>> >>>
>> >>> which means soooo [sic] much coming from a fucking idiot twat such as
>> >>> yourself.
>> >>
>> >>Gonna come say that to my face?
>> >
>> >WEEEEE! I get dibs on the video rights! And we can split the fee when
>> >we send numbnuts body to a medical school.
>> >
>> >Aaron... try to draw it out as long as possible, so we can see lots of
>> >his blood and hear the sounds of breaking bones.. Ive already got a
>> >buyer for the master tape.
>> >
>> >Gunner
>>
>> why doesn't it surprise me that a sick gun nut fuck like gunner would
>> think such trash?
>
>Because he's got a good sense of humor. :-)
>
>Sue
Thanks Sue!
And of course..I have a good business sense as well. I could indeed
sell a video of Aaron giving the Radical a serious attitude adjustment.
..Afterall.. wouldnt Libertarian/Conservitive, with more than 6 weeks
on the net.. love to see a troll who's limited vocabulary includes
"sick gun nut fuck" , get his shit scattered? Then there are the
T-shirt rights...and the bumper sticker, beer and popcorn
residuals..hence the request to draw it out as long as possible.
T-shirt example:
Front Side..
"This is a troll." (picture of a gnormlish nerd like Radical in front of
a computer)
Backside..
" This is a troll after Aaron" (picture of a roadkill with a sandaled
foot and clawed, broken fingered hand, sticking out of the puddle)
Picture the Budwieser frogs... "grease" "a" "troll"
And while Ive never met Aaron..I suspect I could sell a few copies to
the School of the Americas....
Hell.. with the sheer number of trolls out there.. we could completly
replace roller derby and the XFL... hummm this would be a great follow
up for Nascar!
Anyone know where we can find Dolt the Jolt? I might even sign up for
that one myself......
Gunner
""The greatest evil is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted)
in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices...like the
bureaucracy of a police state or a thoroughly nasty business concern."
C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:58:39 GMT
"T. Max Devlin"
> If the prosecution proves you were in no mortal danger, or would not
> have reasonably believed you were in mortal danger, then self-defense
> becomes wrongful death. If you want to play games, that is. But I
> think the fact that you pulled my comment out of context is enough to
> show your lack of argument.
In some jurisdictions in the USA a stranger invading your house is grounds
for use of fatal force. You're not required to show that you were in, or
thought yourself to be in, mortal danger.
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <hi everybody!>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 13:13:01 -0400
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> JS PL wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> > > > And your a College Educated Unix Engineer.....who only uses
> > Windows..Pffft..
> > >
> > > Even after I explain the deception, he still doesn't get it.
> >
> > Explaining something which is possible isn't proof that your doing it.
Your
> > using Windows98 and lying about it. Your worse than Devlin who uses it
and
> > claims he's forced to do it.
> >
> > > > After you deal with your own lies, you can begin throwing
accusations
> > > > around.
> > >
> > > So, what college campus did you trespass upon?
> >
> > SDSU - dropped out after a year, and have never looked back.
>
> Says it all, really.
Says what? I was making more at in my twenties way back in the 80's than you
claim to make now!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 24 Apr 2001 11:53:04 -0500
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:14:50 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>You missed my point; OBVIOUSLY it didn't mean 'thou shalt not kill', as
>plants and animals can be killed. So when you say "it means 'murder'"
>you're pretending like there were judges and juries and rules of
>evidence, so as to exclude involuntary manslaughter. My point is that
>it means 'murder' or 'slay', AND 'kill', and therefore any reasonable
>person must conclude it means 'to kill another human being'.
>
>Thou shalt not. It doesn't say "thou shalt not... unless they are Evil
>or enemies of Israel."
I understand your point and you have just made it clearly here too.
"Thou shalt not murder" can only be understood if it is taken in
context with the other direct commands of God. If you are going to
use the Bible as a source in a debate, then the entire Bible can
be taken into account, otherwise the entire Bible would soley
contain 10 commandments. God gave a commandment "Thou shalt not murder",
He also said that He doesn't lie, He also said that He is a just God,
He also told men on many occassions to go to war and kill people.
He also said that all men deserve to die. He also provided a way
out, and on and on..... The commandments can only be understood
when you attempt to understand what God wants beyond the literal
interpretation of the one sentence commandment.
------------------------------
From: WesTralia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:15:25 -0500
billh wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin"
>
> > If the prosecution proves you were in no mortal danger, or would not
> > have reasonably believed you were in mortal danger, then self-defense
> > becomes wrongful death. If you want to play games, that is. But I
> > think the fact that you pulled my comment out of context is enough to
> > show your lack of argument.
>
> In some jurisdictions in the USA a stranger invading your house is grounds
> for use of fatal force. You're not required to show that you were in, or
> thought yourself to be in, mortal danger.
Yep, this is very true in South Carolina and Texas (probably other
states also). The law is referred to as the "Don't Ask" law. If
an intruder breaks into my house here in Texas then the State gives
me the right to be judge, jury, and executioner. The incident won't
even go to the grand jury.
Of course, I don't own a gun so I may have to "ask!" ;-)
--
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <hi everybody!>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 13:19:51 -0400
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Personally, I love capitalism,
Secretly, you don't.
>and Microsoft is living proof of what
> happens when you break the rules of the market place, you get hauled
> through the courts.
Every large comany participates in lawsuits and court battles as a matter of
routine business. You mistakenly pretend that it's a reflection of their
ethics. Microsoft customers know differently. That's why it's the chosen OS
product of 98% of all PC users.
>Look at the UNIX market place, cut throat
> competition between IBM, SUN, SGI and UNISYS, something sorely lacking
> from the consumer marketplace.
You have no idea what your talking about do you?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
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: 24 Apr 2001 17:20:52 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 24 Apr 2001 14:57:22 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 24 Apr 2001 12:37:55 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:43:43 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> >On 23 Apr 2001 19:31:57 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>Bzzzt. Not everything is a dichotomy.
>>>>>> >>In this case, in particular, you are presenting something that is NOT
>>>>>> >>a dichotomy as if it were one. That's why it's a FALSE dichotomy.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>Don't they teach logic in Perdue?
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >Oh brother! Roberto lecturing on logic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I actually did precisely that a couple of times. With lanctern and all.
>>>>>
>>>>>Talk about malpractice.
>>>>
>>>>Wanna discuss Gödel's theorem's proof? Start by proposing an alternate
>-----------------|||||||||||||||||||||||------------------------^^^^^^^^^
>> -----T---
>>Chad, read here:----------------------------------------------------+
>>
>>>>paradox for the setup.
>>>>
>>>>Roberto Alsina
>>>
>>>This sentence is false.
> ---------T-------------
> +--------------------------------- Roberto, read here
Well, either you don't know the meaning of "alternate" or are not
familiar with Gödel's theorem's proof.
>>Follow the instructions above, then try again.
>>--
>>Roberto Alsina
>
>Read your instructions above, then try again.
What a putz.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
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: 24 Apr 2001 17:21:51 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:55:54 -0700, Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 24 Apr 2001 12:57:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:12:05 -0700, Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 23 Apr 2001 19:27:50 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>The government should protect people from danger.
>>>>Isn't that why people should pay for the army?
>>>
>>>Wrong. No one is going to pay to give you your own guardian angel. We
>>>pay for the military to keep other nations from destroying our nation.
>>
>>Is that not a danger? Is that not protection?
>
>Sure is, to the nation. However..courts have held consistently, that the
>State has no obligation to protect the Individual.
Protecting the nation is protecting the individuals.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: 24 Apr 2001 17:24:43 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 24 Apr 2001 15:53:40 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 24 Apr 2001 14:59:48 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>On 24 Apr 2001 12:58:57 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You said women are better off when they are not allowed to walk in
>>>>>>the street without male company.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That's pretty hateful.
>>>>>
>>>>>Prehaps as hateful as people like you who would like to see women
>>>>>walk along in the street with no pratical way to protect themselves.
>>>>
>>>>I want women to be able to walk alone if they want to. It seems that
>>>>you only want freedom for yourself. Or you want to be forbidden from
>>>>walking alone, too? A gang could harm you.
>>>
>>>Just as I said.
>>
>>Just as you said what?
>>
>>>People like you would like to see woman walk alone
>>>with no practical way to protect themselves.
>>
>>Maybe it's too hard for you, so I will use small words.
>>I want women to walk how they want to walk. Women want walk alone?
>>Woman walks alone. Woman wants escort? Woman gets escort.
>>
>>Woman wants to walk alone can not? Bad.
>>Woman wants not to walk alone can not? Bad.
>>
>>Maybe this time you'll understand this simple concept.
>>
>
>I know that logical thinking is difficult for you, so I will try
>to be clear:
>
>It can be dangrous for women to walk alone.
So, women should be forbidden from doing anything that's dangerous?
Assuming you are not sexist, so should men, right?
Want to forbid rollerskates, too?
[snip]
>People like you would like to
>see women walk alone with no practical way to protect themselves.
You are nuts.
>>> Women with guns are a good thing. Women willing to use guns are
>>> even a better thing.
>>
>>Now that's a very strange fetichism.
>
>Typical sexist remark.
Why?
--
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: 24 Apr 2001 17:25:36 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 24 Apr 2001 13:25:52 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Roberto Alsina"
>>>
>>>> >> Remains a blatant assertion? Indeed!
>>>> >
>>>> >Truth quite often is blatant.
>>>>
>>>> So are lies.
>>>
>>>Such as stating a soldier killing in war equates to murder.
>>
>>Which I never did, in those terms. Go check the archives and see.
>
>He said exactly that, in different terms. Go check the archives and see.
Prove it, altar boy.
--
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: 24 Apr 2001 17:26:26 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
billh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Roberto Alsina"
>
>> >Such as stating a soldier killing in war equates to murder.
>>
>> Which I never did, in those terms. Go check the archives and see.
>
>So, are we now to understand that you have no problem with soldiers killing
>in war?
I have problems with anyone killing anyone ever. Some problems
are worse than others, of course.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
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.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 24 Apr 2001 12:04:07 -0500
On 24 Apr 2001 17:20:52 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On 24 Apr 2001 14:57:22 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On 24 Apr 2001 12:37:55 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:43:43 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chad Everett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>> >On 23 Apr 2001 19:31:57 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>Bzzzt. Not everything is a dichotomy.
>>>>>>> >>In this case, in particular, you are presenting something that is NOT
>>>>>>> >>a dichotomy as if it were one. That's why it's a FALSE dichotomy.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>Don't they teach logic in Perdue?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >Oh brother! Roberto lecturing on logic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I actually did precisely that a couple of times. With lanctern and all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Talk about malpractice.
>>>>>
>>>>>Wanna discuss Gödel's theorem's proof? Start by proposing an alternate
>>-----------------|||||||||||||||||||||||------------------------^^^^^^^^^
>>> -----T---
>>>Chad, read here:----------------------------------------------------+
>>>
>>>>>paradox for the setup.
>>>>>
>>>>>Roberto Alsina
>>>>
>>>>This sentence is false.
>> ---------T-------------
>> +--------------------------------- Roberto, read here
>
>Well, either you don't know the meaning of "alternate" or are not
>familiar with Gödel's theorem's proof.
>
>>>Follow the instructions above, then try again.
>>>--
>>>Roberto Alsina
>>
>>Read your instructions above, then try again.
>
>What a putz.
>
You obviously don't understand your own instructions. Maybe English is not
your primary language.
What a doofus.
1 : occurring or succeeding by turns <a day of alternate sunshine and rain>
2 a : arranged first on one side and then on the other at different levels
or points along an axial line <alternate leaves> -- compare
OPPOSITE b : arranged one above or alongside the other
3 : every other : every second <he works on alternate days>
4 : constituting an alternative <took the alternate route home>
5 : ALTERNATIVE 3
- al·ter·nate·ly adverb
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
