Re: "It's not my problem"

[Keith Henson]

At 06:13 PM 10/05/04 -0500, you wrote:
--===1641545295==

Long.
<>
...
"It's not my problem"
Rwanda
"It's not my problem"

Bosnia

"It's not my problem"

Somalia

"It's not my problem"

Myanmar

"It's not my problem"

North Korea

"It's not my problem"

Sudan

"It's not my problem!"

Perpetrators, collaborators, bystanders, victims: we can be clear about
three of these categories. The bystander, however, is the fulcrum. If
there are enough notable exceptions, then protest reaches a critical
mass. We don't usually think of history as being shaped by silence, but,
as English philosopher Edmund Burke said, `The only thing necessary for
the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.'
"Well... It's not my problem"
My wife had wondered for many years about how so many Germans stood by and 
let the holocaust happen?

She got her wish when we were attacked by the terrifying scientology cult 
and I was driven into exile.

"Thou shalt not be a victim. Thou shalt not be a perpetrator. Above all, 
thou shalt not be a bystander."

--Holocaust Museum

But the reality is that the number of people who be anything but bystanders 
when they see vicious injustice being done is too small to have an effect 
even on a relatively small (40-50k tops in the USA) cult like scientology.

Keith Henson


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Trailer trash... but no less American

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 10:58 PM 5/11/04, Matthew Bos wrote:
On 5/11/04 10:04 PM, "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> In other words, to the America that the New York Times addresses,
> redneck still means bigot and - this is not putting it too strongly -
> pervert. What would have clinched the dismissal of the Abu Ghraib
> incidents as the excesses of people whom enlightened America despises
> was the specifically sexual element of degradation."
>
> "If the US Army is now recruiting no-hopers from its social swamps,
> then it must come to terms with the fact that they, too, are Americans,
> who are prepared to die for their country - however alien their idea of
> it may be to their condescending countrymen."
But don't people in New York and San Francisco pay a lot of money to people
who will abuse them and put them on leashes?


So I've heard.  And not just in NY and SF, or so I've heard . . .

-- Ronn!  :)


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 08:11 PM 5/11/04, William T Goodall wrote:

On 11 May 2004, at 6:29 pm, Nick Arnett wrote:

Travis Edmunds wrote:


This is funny. Yes, it is decidedly unchristian to give much thought to 
people who *sin*, or to people of other religions (meaning that every 
religion is THE religion) going to Hell, Hades, the 'fiery deeps', or 
whatever you want to call it. Although...on second thought I will call 
it Hell as we are after all talking about Christianity. Anyway, my point 
is this - the actual belief that sinners and everyone else who for 
whatever reason cannot make it into Heaven (supposedly most go to 
Purgatory) is a key part of Christian dogma.
No, that's a part of church-ianity dogma.  Christ taught quite the 
opposite -- that God loves us in our failures.  It seems that many 
churches only give lip service to the unconditional love that the Bible 
illustrates in parable after parable.  Instead the message comes out that 
you must repent before you can be forgiven, which is backwards from the gospel.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_defn.htm

"There are on the order of 1,000 denominations, para-church organizations, 
and other groups in the U.S. who consider themselves to be Christian.  One 
could assemble a random group of adults and ask each individual to sort 
the 1,000 groups into two piles: those which are "truly" Christian, and 
those that are not. In many cases, an individual will select their own 
faith group as the only truly Christian denomination, and define all of 
the other 999 as sub-Christian, quasi-Christian, or non-Christian. Other 
individuals might say that all 1,000 denominations are Christian. Most 
likely, a given individual will select most of the 1,000 groups as 
Christian, and reject the others. There is no possibility of reaching a 
common definition which would identify which groups are "truly" Christian"

http://www.religioustolerance.org/evan_dic.htm

"An Evangelical who visits a Mormon web site might well be surprised
to find that Mormons consider themselves to be Christians. He or she
might have been taught that Mormons are sub-Christians, quasi-Christians, 
or non-Christians. He might be further confused to find that the Church of 
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regards their denomination as the "true" 
Christian church. They view other Christian denominations as having 
strayed from the teachings of Jesus and of the Bible.

A liberal or mainline Christian might be confused if they visit a
counter-cult web site, and find their own denomination listed as a
non-Christian cult, simply because it does not teach that God inspired the 
authors of the Bible to write books that are inerrant -- free of error.

Since there are so many different definitions of the word "Christian,"
we recommend that the term rarely be use alone. If it is qualified by 
an  adjective, such as "born-again" or "conservative"  or "Evangelical" or 
"mainline" or "liberal,"  then confusion and even hurt feelings will be 
minimized.


Sorry, not always.  Some want to be called "Christians", to emphasize that 
they are *Christians*, as opposed to, say, those "non-Christian Mormons" . . .

-- Ronn!  :)


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Beheading Avenges Prison Abuse

[Matthew and Julie Bos]

On 5/11/04 8:58 PM, "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The Other Shoe Maru

As much as I like tag lines, this one gets me.  These people can kill a man
on video, and you can go ahead and justify it.  Great.  At least I can get a
taste of what I am going to read tomorrow in the New York Times.

Matthew Bos


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Beheading Avenges Prison Abuse

[Matthew and Julie Bos]

On 5/11/04 10:23 PM, "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Michael Berg said he blamed the U.S. government for creating
> circumstances that led to his son's death. He said if his son hadn't
> been detained for so long, he might have been able to leave the
> country before the violence worsened.

As much as he has a right to be angry, I blame the guy with the knife and
his masked buddies.  But then again I do gloss over the big issues...

Matthew

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Trailer trash... but no less American

[Matthew and Julie Bos]

On 5/11/04 10:04 PM, "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> In other words, to the America that the New York Times addresses,
> redneck still means bigot and - this is not putting it too strongly -
> pervert. What would have clinched the dismissal of the Abu Ghraib
> incidents as the excesses of people whom enlightened America despises
> was the specifically sexual element of degradation."
> 
> "If the US Army is now recruiting no-hopers from its social swamps,
> then it must come to terms with the fact that they, too, are Americans,
> who are prepared to die for their country - however alien their idea of
> it may be to their condescending countrymen."

But don't people in New York and San Francisco pay a lot of money to people
who will abuse them and put them on leashes?

Just a thought,
Matthew Bos

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Beheading Avenges Prison Abuse

[Gary Denton]

On Tue, 11 May 2004 19:58:26 -0500, Robert Seeberger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...> http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040511/D82GL8V00.html
http://pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-16/108430077760820.xml
> 
> The family of an American civilian shown beheaded on an Islamic
> militant Web site huddled in in tears Tuesday after learning of the
> existence of the graphic videotape.

Michael Berg lashed out at the U.S. military and Bush administration,
saying his son might still be alive had he not been detained by U.S.
officials in Iraq without being charged and without access to a
lawyer.

Michael Berg said he blamed the U.S. government for creating
circumstances that led to his son's death. He said if his son hadn't
been detained for so long, he might have been able to leave the
country before the violence worsened.

"I think a lot of people are fed up with the lack of civil rights this
thing has caused," he said. "I don't think this administration is
committed to democracy."

Also NPR has a conversation:
http://here-now.org/shows/2004/05/20040511_6.asp

Beheading video is online but I don't feel like posting the link.

Prayers and sympathy are due the Berg family.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Trailer trash... but no less American

[William T Goodall]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/05/12/ 
do1202.xml

"Those horrific photographs from Abu Ghraib may have thrown Washington  
into a frenzy, but outside the Beltway they have apparently caused less  
of an uproar. While public opinion across America does now seem to have  
become aroused by the evidence of torture, it is at least as concerned  
about the continued loss of American lives in what is, rather  
optimistically, called "post-war" Iraq."



"It is because, when most of enlightened, moderately well educated  
America hears the words "West Virginia trailer park" associated with  
outrageous behaviour, they know exactly what to think: "This has got  
absolutely nothing to do with me. This is not my America. These people  
do not represent anything that I identify with, or take pride in. This  
is White Trash USA - which I like to pretend does not exist until I  
have to confront its grinning face splashed across my television screen  
on top of a pile of nude Iraqi detainees."

The gulf (and the animosity) between backwoods, redneck America and  
educated, liberal urban America is much greater than that between the  
classes in Britain. Here, class is now essentially a metropolitan  
phenomenon: it is the proletarians of the city versus the bourgeoisie  
of the city and its environs.

But in America, there is a true rural working class, whose lives and  
mores are held in a degree of contempt that is almost impossible to  
imagine in Britain, where society has become so homogenised."



"Redneck America was, during my childhood, almost invisible in the  
official portrait of national life. It surfaced (and that is probably  
the apposite word) into public notice in a big way for the first time  
in my adolescence, with the sensational news that a rock 'n' roll star,  
Jerry Lee Lewis, had married his 13-year-old cousin.

 (The predilection for incest is now immortalised in hundreds of fairly  
good-natured "You're probably a redneck" jokes. "You're probably, etc -  
if you think a family reunion is a great place to meet girls; if your  
state has passed a law saying that, when a couple are divorced, they're  
still legally brother and sister.")"



"To most of idealistic - and idealised - America, the national values  
are freedom, democracy and opportunity. For redneck America, what the  
country stands for is the right to bear arms and not to be messed  
around by federal government. There is a good deal of the old  
Confederacy spirit here: people for whom the civil war never ended, or  
least ended the wrong way.

In other words, to the America that the New York Times addresses,  
redneck still means bigot and - this is not putting it too strongly -  
pervert. What would have clinched the dismissal of the Abu Ghraib  
incidents as the excesses of people whom enlightened America despises  
was the specifically sexual element of degradation."



"If the US Army is now recruiting no-hopers from its social swamps,  
then it must come to terms with the fact that they, too, are Americans,  
who are prepared to die for their country - however alien their idea of  
it may be to their condescending countrymen."

Roadkill pie Maru

--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/
"Invest in a company any idiot can run because sooner or later any  
idiot is going to run it."  -  Warren Buffet

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[William T Goodall]

On 11 May 2004, at 6:29 pm, Nick Arnett wrote:

Travis Edmunds wrote:


This is funny. Yes, it is decidedly unchristian to give much thought 
to people who *sin*, or to people of other religions (meaning that 
every religion is THE religion) going to Hell, Hades, the 'fiery 
deeps', or whatever you want to call it. Although...on second thought 
I will call it Hell as we are after all talking about Christianity. 
Anyway, my point is this - the actual belief that sinners and 
everyone else who for whatever reason cannot make it into Heaven 
(supposedly most go to Purgatory) is a key part of Christian dogma.
No, that's a part of church-ianity dogma.  Christ taught quite the 
opposite -- that God loves us in our failures.  It seems that many 
churches only give lip service to the unconditional love that the 
Bible illustrates in parable after parable.  Instead the message comes 
out that you must repent before you can be forgiven, which is 
backwards from the gospel.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_defn.htm

"There are on the order of 1,000 denominations, para-church 
organizations, and other groups in the U.S. who consider themselves to 
be Christian.  One could assemble a random group of adults and ask each 
individual to sort the 1,000 groups into two piles: those which are 
"truly" Christian, and those that are not. In many cases, an individual 
will select their own faith group as the only truly Christian 
denomination, and define all of the other 999 as sub-Christian, 
quasi-Christian, or non-Christian. Other individuals might say that all 
1,000 denominations are Christian. Most likely, a given individual will 
select most of the 1,000 groups as Christian, and reject the others. 
There is no possibility of reaching a common definition which would 
identify which groups are "truly" Christian"

http://www.religioustolerance.org/evan_dic.htm

"An Evangelical who visits a Mormon web site might well be surprised  
to find that Mormons consider themselves to be Christians. He or she  
might have been taught that Mormons are sub-Christians, 
quasi-Christians, or non-Christians. He might be further confused to 
find that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regards their 
denomination as the "true" Christian church. They view other Christian 
denominations as having strayed from the teachings of Jesus and of the 
Bible.

A liberal or mainline Christian might be confused if they visit a  
counter-cult web site, and find their own denomination listed as a  
non-Christian cult, simply because it does not teach that God inspired 
the authors of the Bible to write books that are inerrant -- free of 
error.

Since there are so many different definitions of the word "Christian,"  
we recommend that the term rarely be use alone. If it is qualified by 
an  adjective, such as "born-again" or "conservative"  or "Evangelical" 
or "mainline" or "liberal,"  then confusion and even hurt feelings will 
be minimized. In a recent  episode of "Unshackled," a Fundamentalist 
Christian radio  drama from Chicago, IL, an actor said that she had 
been raised in a Roman Catholic  neighborhood, but that many of her 
childhood friends had become  Christians. A Roman Catholic would 
probably be deeply offended by such a statement; a mainline or liberal 
Christian might well be confused; only a  conservative Protestant would 
probably understand what she meant: that  some of her friends had been 
raised as Roman Catholics, which she considered to be Pagan and not 
Christian. Some of the friends had been  "born again" later in life, 
and converted to Evangelical  Christianity. If the actress had said 
that her friends had "become  born again" or "become Evangelical 
Christians"  then the hurt and confusion would be eliminated, and 
everyone would  understand exactly what she meant."

So which of the ~1000 cults are you speaking from Nick?

--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/
"The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever 
that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the silliness of the 
majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more likely to be foolish 
than sensible."
- Bertrand Russell

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Beheading Avenges Prison Abuse

[Robert Seeberger]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040511/D82GL8V00.html

A video posted Tuesday on an al-Qaida-linked Web site showed the
beheading of an American civilian in Iraq and said the execution was
carried out to avenge abuses of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison.
In a grisly gesture, the executioners held up the man's head for the
camera.

The American identified himself on the video as Nick Berg, a
26-year-old Philadelphia native. His body was found near a highway
overpass in Baghdad on Saturday, the same day he was beheaded, a U.S.
official said.

The video bore the title "Abu Musab al-Zarqawi shown slaughtering an
American." It was unclear whether al-Zarqawi - an associate of Osama
bin Laden believed behind the wave of suicide bombings in Iraq - was
shown in the video or simply ordered the execution. Al-Zarqawi also is
sought in the assassination of a U.S. diplomat in Jordan in 2002.

MORE.



http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6172.htm



http://pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-16/108430077760820.xml

The family of an American civilian shown beheaded on an Islamic
militant Web site huddled in in tears Tuesday after learning of the
existence of the graphic videotape.



xponent

The Other Shoe Maru

rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Mexico Air Force Video Creates UFO Stir

[Robert Seeberger]

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=scienceNews&storyID=5109891

The Mexican Air Force has released footage of what a UFO expert said
were 11 invisible unidentified flying objects picked up by an infrared
camera as they whizzed around a surveillance plane.
A long-time believer in flying saucers, journalist Jaime Maussan told
a news conference on Tuesday the objects were real and seemed
"intelligent" after they at one point changed direction and surrounded
the plane chasing them.

"They were invisible to the eye but they were there, there is no doubt
about it. They had mass, they had energy and they were moving about,"
he said, after showing a 15-minute video he said the Defense Ministry
gave him permission to publicize.

The ministry confirmed to Reuters it had provided the video, filmed by
the Air Force on March 5 over the eastern coastal state of Campeche.

"We are not alone! This is so weird," one of the pilots can be heard
yelling, after the plane's crew switched on an infrared camera to
track the objects, first picked up by radar.

The film, recorded by a plane looking for drugs trafficking near the
Gulf of Mexico, shows 11 objects as blobs of light that hover in
formation or dart about, sometimes disappearing into cloud.

Mexico's most popular nightly news broadcast showed the video on
Monday night.

Interviewed by Mausson on another section of the video, the pilots
said they grew nervous when the objects, still invisible, turned back
during a chase and surrounded the plane.

"There was a moment when ... the screens showed they were behind us,
to the left and in front of us. It was at that point that I felt a bit
tense," said Maj. Magdaleno Castanon.

Mexico has a long history of fanciful UFO sightings, most of which are
dismissed by scientists as space debris, missiles, weather balloons,
natural weather phenomena or hoaxes.




xponent

Collect Them All Maru

rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Iraqi Prison Abuse Scandal: "Maybe they were born that way!"

[William T Goodall]

Located by the entertaining morons.org site, this story is a hoot!

http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/r/reynalds/04/reynalds050704.htm

" Could it be, as Rush Limbaugh mentioned in passing on a recent 
broadcast, that the perpetrators of the alleged crime are homosexuals? 
If that's the case, maybe the motivation for their activities was far 
different than from what has been discussed in the media's wall to wall 
coverage of this incident. If these individuals are homosexuals, maybe 
they were getting stimulated by looking at naked Iraqis in sexually 
provocative positions.

 Of course, as Limbaugh said because of the military's "don't ask, 
don't tell" policy concerning homosexuality we'll probably never know 
the answer, but I think the scenario is still definitely worth 
considering.

 After all, it would answer why the alleged activities took place and 
it would also provide a solution to the really bizarre question as to 
why pictures were taken of the humiliating and sexually suggestive 
poses. "

--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web  : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk
Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it.
-- Donald E. Knuth
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: [L3] Re: Warhorses (was: What America Does with its Hegemony)

[Damon Agretto]

> la gineta style of riding, which influenced the horse
> cultures of the Gauchos, Charros and Llaneros."
>
> They spell it "gineta."  (I'd seen it as something
> more like "jineta.")

FYI this seems to be alluding to the Jinetes class of military fighting men
of Spain, of lower class and equipment than a knight and IIRC drawn from the
free peasantry or possibly holding fiefs as sergeants. They wore little to
no armor, and were adept at horsemanship in a way and style that was
different from knights and other mtd sergeants then in Europe (using short
sturrups and smaller saddles, rather than in other nations, where the trend
was towards longer stirrups and higher saddles, which were beneficial when
fighting on horseback).

> OK - and I'm coming at it from a horseman's
> perspective as well.  But then is this site incorrect,
> WRT the Battle of Hastings?

Numbers seem a little off, or rather, a little high. Willian probably had
half that number. Additionally, William's knights were less than decisive.
In a time when battles lasted a few hours at the most, Hastings apparently
(according to the sources) lasted most of the day, from about dawn to dusk.
William's cavalry had great difficulty against the English, who had arrayed
themselves on a ridge that IIRC straddled the Old Roman road from the coast.
So not only was Willaim charging up-hill, but he was additionally charging
into the shields and spears of the English.

The English fighting style of the day was a shieldwall...essentially
fighting men would array themselves much like a Greek phalanx with shields
nearly overlapping, presenting the enemy a wall bristling with spears. As
long as they kept the formation and remained steady (the front ranks were
often made up the best armored and steadiest of men, usually wealthy freemen
oweing fyrd service, or even the household troops -- Housecarls -- of the
nobles and the King) horses will not charge through such an impedement.
Additionally, the terrain was such that Willaim couldn't turn the flanks.

Some of the sources suggest that one branch of King Harold Godwinson's army
became emboldened at the latest failed charge of Willaims knights and tried
to pursue. They broke formation and were destroyed by the knights. This
breach allowed the knights then to roll up the flanks and (eventually) kill
Harold (though the sources differ on how he was killed).
> OTOH, this site says they carried under 300#:

Yes, I agree more with this. My sources (such as Prestwich, Contamine and
Nicolle) suggest the size and power of warhorses were more for the endurance
they could provide, rather than sheer lifting (or carrying) power.
Additionally (to dispell more myths) a fully armored fighting man in plate
armor was quite agile, and probably less burdened than a modern infantryman
wearing a full pack. Sources (not to mention modern reenactors) show that a
fully armored man could leap over the hindquarters of his mount and do other
feats.

Additionally, horse armor was rare in European armies until much later.
Although there is tantalizing mentions of mail bard for warhorses as early
as the late 12th C, horse armor didn't really appear to be popular (unless
you count the heraldric bard of earlier times -- trappers and such -- which
may have hid padded armor that was surprisingly effective against slashing
blows than one would think) until the 14th C, when leather and/or steel
armor was used to protect the head and chest of horses. It wasn't until a
century later that full plate bard would come to use, probably starting
early in the 15th C, but becoming more popular (relatively speaking) around
the middle to late 15th C.

Damon.

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Not All Bad

[Gary Denton]

That has become pretty common on local news and newspapers.  I have
seen it three times now, once on TV.



On Tue, 11 May 2004 05:25:10 -0500, Robert Seeberger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> http://www.drudgereport.com/iiraq.htm
> 
> Here's an image you will not see in the NEW YORKER or on 60 MINUTES:
> 
> An American soldier welcomed as a hero in Iraq!
> 
> As the world's satellites and printing presses await fresh images of
> troop horrors and abuse, soldiers on the ground e-mailed this snap of
> warm greetings from some of Iraq's women and children.
> 
> xponent
> Linked Maru
> rob
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Addendum - Re: Warhorses

[Deborah Harrell]

I found some more interesting sites, and will try to
find my books at home (many still packed away).

Fun!  :D

Debbi
who must go feed the ponies *now*




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: [L3] Re: Scouted: Protecting Creation on Earth Day

[Gary Denton]

On Tue, 11 May 2004 13:37:09 -0700 (PDT), Deborah Harrell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > I
> > think I'm being fair in paraphrasing her concluding
> > thought by saying that she suggests that in the
> > conclusion to my last message I was lumping together
> > extremists and the mainstream environmental movement
> > in talking about the banning of DDT.
> >
> > My rebuttal to that argument is simple - no one uses
> > DDT anymore.  Basically no one in the world.  If
> > it's only the extremsists, how come they won so
> > completely?
> 
> Question: how does the US ban of DDT prevent any other
> country from making it?
> 
> >  Everyone knew - without any doubt whatsoever,
> > _everyone knew_ - that banning DDT would cause a
> > massive spike in malaria worldwide.  It was
> > nonetheless banned, and malaria did spike.  90+% of
> > the people in the world who have died of malaria
> > since
> > DDT was banned _died because DDT was banned_. 
> 
> Do you have a site handy for that figure?  (If not,
> I'll try to find it at some point.)
> 
> Debbi

I had posted this before: DDT was not banned.

http://www.malaria.org/inthenews.html

There was a proposal to ban it entirely in December, it failed becuase
of the poor countries who still use it for malaria control.

Why use DDT? It can be highly effective for several years in killing
mosquitos. (Eventually mosquitos more immune to DDT predominate.)
Alternatives are about 50% more expensive.
 
Why not use DDT? The World Wildlife Fund and Physicians for Social
Responsibility, among many others, indict DDT chillingly: as a
carcinogen, a teratogen, an immunosupressant, that stays in biological
systems and concentrates as it moves up the food chain.  It was
responsible for almost wiping out some species of birds in the United
States and measurable quantities were being detected in mother's milk.

The treaty on banning persistent organic pollutants such as DDT
decided to make an exception for malaria control. However, some
people, ahem, have decided to make this an issue to bash
environmentalists.

For a paper from both sides before the treaty vote see here:
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/321/7273/1403

#1 on google for liberal news
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

[L3] Re: Warhorses (was: What America Does with its Hegemony)

[Deborah Harrell]

> Damon Agretto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[I wrote]

> > I'll try to find some on-line pix of the various
> > riding styles (knight vs. Moor) etc.
 
> The reason why I inquired is because, as you may
> know, I have a history
> degree, and would tenatively describe myself as a
> military historian. I have
> plenty of source material on the subject. But when
> you say that Arabians
> "revolutionized" cavalry, you must be very careful
> to define specifically what you mean. 

"Arabians and Barbs," I wrote; the 'revolution' was in
the changeover from heavier-type horses to lighter,
more responsive ones -- although this is certainly
from the horseman's perspective, and I daresay the
introduction of guns had a far more revolutionary
impact on warfare than a change of riding technique.
It was not overnight, as the Muslim invasion began in
~711 AD, and conflict continued for centuries.

http://www.sulphurs.com/history.htm
"Regardless of the exact influence of one breed over
another [Iberian Sorreia and North African Barb -
there is some evidence that the Barb came from the
Sorreia and not the other way 'round], it is evident
that the exchange of blood was mutually beneficial and
that it produced many similarities between the two
breeds, to the point that the modern Barb resembles
the Iberian stock and the Criollo horses of South
America. During the almost eight hundred years in
which Spain and Portugal were in constant war with the
Moors, horse and horsemanship had become finely
attuned to the war exercises. This superb war horse
was the one that the conquistadors introduced and
dispersed throughout the New World together with the a
la gineta style of riding, which influenced the horse
cultures of the Gauchos, Charros and Llaneros." 

They spell it "gineta."  (I'd seen it as something
more like "jineta.")  [This site is somewhat biased in
favor of the antiquity of the Iberian horse and its
influence - but so are Arabian, Appaloosa and many
other breeders/sites!  IMHO, the Arabian and the
Iberian are both very important in the history of
horsebreeds - but not coincidentally, I adore both.]

I also mentioned 'other oriental horses' and they were
introduced to the Iberian Penninsula at various times:

http://www.appaloosa-crossing.com/history101.htm
"Great quantities of Oriental blood were introduced
into Spain centuries prior to the birth of Christ. 
Periods of civilization and/or invasion of the
peninsula include those of the Iberians (originally
from north of Africa), peoples of the Alamanni,
Basques (province of Navarre), Carthaginians, Celts,
Cimbrians, Franks, Greeks, the Moorish invasion of
172-175 A.D., the Muslim invasion of 711 A.D.,
Ostragoths, Phoenicians, Romans, Suebi, Teutons,
Vandals, Vistigoths, and perhaps some others (and not
in order given).  Each of these civilizations brought
horses that had an influence on the native horses of
Spain."
[although the Sorreia-type has I think the more
ancient claim and influence, and I believe that it is
also found in cave paintings.]

>For example, I'm a big proponent of
> the Late Medieval
> military revolution of using fully mounted armies.
> This revolution was
> strategic, rather than tactical (most of the troops
> would ride to the
> battlefield, but dismount to actually come to grips
> with the enemy). So obviously our terms differ.

OK - and I'm coming at it from a horseman's
perspective as well.  But then is this site incorrect,
WRT the Battle of Hastings?

http://www.imh.org/imh/kyhpl2a.html#xtocid165601
"In 1066, William the Conqueror of Normandy put 3,000
horses on 700 small sailing ships and headed across
the channel to England. William had come to secure his
right to the English throne from King Harold. They met
in a valley near Hastings where William's army was
victorious due largely to his cavalry assisted by
archers. They charged into the wall of shields put up
by the Saxon infantry, but shields were little defense
against war-horses and knights." 
 
> For more information, I would highly reccommend
> looking at medieval history
> books. In particular, Michael Prestwich in _Armies
> and Warfare in the Middle
> Ages: The English Experience_ has some good info on
> warhorses in medieval
> England (which would probably be applicable to other
> areas of Europe,
> especially as the English busily imported breeding
> stock from Spain during the 14th C).

  And from Friesland as well:
http://www.imh.org/imh/bw/friesian.html
"From records of the past we know that the Friesian
horse of old was famous. There is information from as
early as 1251 and there are books in which Friesian
horses were mentioned and praised from as early as the
16th century. 

"Armored knights of old found this horse very
desirable, having the strength to carry great weight
into battle and still maneuver quickly. Later, its
suppleness and agility made the breed much sought
after for use in riding schools in Paris and Spain
during the 15th and 16th centuries...

"...The well-known E

Re: Darwin's Radio

[Bemmzim]

In a message dated 5/10/2004 3:36:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

> I was really disappointed. If one more person takes poor *Chuck's* name in 
> >vain
> >like this I think I am going to *throw up*.
> 
> 
> 
> Pun intended?


I am not that smart or funny or when it comes to puns is it unfunny?

> 
> 
> 
> How Much Wood Could A Woodchuck Upchuck If A Woodchuck Had The 24-Hour 
> Stomach Bug Maru
> 
> 

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Robert Seeberger]

- Original Message - 
From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out


> Travis Edmunds wrote:
>
>
> > This is funny. Yes, it is decidedly unchristian to give much
thought to
> > people who *sin*, or to people of other religions (meaning that
every
> > religion is THE religion) going to Hell, Hades, the 'fiery deeps',
or
> > whatever you want to call it. Although...on second thought I will
call
> > it Hell as we are after all talking about Christianity. Anyway, my
point
> > is this - the actual belief that sinners and everyone else who for
> > whatever reason cannot make it into Heaven (supposedly most go to
> > Purgatory) is a key part of Christian dogma.
>
> No, that's a part of church-ianity dogma.  Christ taught quite the
> opposite -- that God loves us in our failures.  It seems that many
> churches only give lip service to the unconditional love that the
Bible
> illustrates in parable after parable.  Instead the message comes out
> that you must repent before you can be forgiven, which is backwards
from
> the gospel.
>
> The good news is that we are acceptable to God exactly as we are.
> Jesus' harshest words were for the self-righteous, who rejected that
idea.
>

I might add to that that milder Christians seem to understand that
much better than most fundamentalists.



xponent
Beatitudes Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Robert Seeberger]

- Original Message - 
From: "Travis Edmunds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out


>
>
>  Organized religion is hypocrisy at it's finest.

There is some truth to that, but I must say that pointing it out seems
to make things worse for the most part.

>
>
> That doesn't sound radical to me. On the contrary, it sounds like
the smooth
> running of the gears in the Church of Rome (catholicism).

Maybe it varies by diocese, but I never heard of tithing 'til I was an
adult and my Protestant friends explained how *their* churches worked.
I was a bit dumbfounded.

Maybe someone here knows, but I thought the Vatican's riches had quite
a bit to do with banking over the last few centuries.


xponent
And Taxes Before Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Robert Seeberger]

- Original Message - 
From: "Horn, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 6:05 AM
Subject: RE: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out


> From: Robert Seeberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> Untrue John.
> Christian describes a multitude of varying forms of belief.
> Southern Baptists are just one brand on the shelf.
>
> Frex...and correct me if I am wrong, but Catholics are a
larger
> set of Christians in America than Southern Baptists.
> Though I will grant you that Southern Baptists may be louder
> concerning their beliefs and more forceful in regards to making
their
> environment conform to their religious beliefs.
> But in no way do I see Southern Baptists as the stereotype for all
> Christians.
> Fundamentalists perhaps..

I know all that.  I never meant to say that Baptists were
representative of all Christians.  Far from it.  In my experience,
if you ask someone who isn't a Baptist what religion they are they
will say "Presbyterian" or "Episcopal" or "Catholic".  Or if they
are asking you, they will say something like "what church to you go
to?" or something like that.  A Baptist will ask "Are you a
Christian?"  And they don't appear to include any of the above.

*
(Sorry about misunderstanding you)
I find the above very agreeable and it conforms nicely to my personal
experience.
It is as if fundamentalists of the same stripe as Southern Baptists
use a substantially different toolkit from other milder Christians. A
toolkit with quite a few hammers and crowbars and not enough
screwdrivers and wrenches.


xponent
Metaphors That Confuse Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: heavy rains, floodwater

[Robert Seeberger]

- Original Message - 
From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 9:50 AM
Subject: Re: heavy rains, floodwater


> Kevin Tarr wrote:
> >
> > Sunday night in SOUTH central PA there was a train of
thunderstorms, a line
> > that pops up over the same area and moves in the direction of the
storm
> > front, instead of tracking perpendicular. Estimates say there was
6+ inches
> > in four hours in some places. But from a different source
estimates from
> > Doppler radar can be high when hail is in a storm, usually
doubling the
> > actual amount that fell.
> >
> > Sadly two people died in the flood waters from the storm. But only
one
> > story stated that the person drove onto a bridge already covered
with
> > water. While I have sympathy for the dead, every story should be
stating
> > the wrong decision that lead to the deaths instead of ignoring it.
> >
> > Kevin T. - VRWC
> > News you can use
>
> They're not playing that up?
>
> Around here, whenever there's a storm system leading to flooding,
every
> media outlet I'm aware of warns everyone not to drive over bridges
> covered with water.  Repeatedly.  And there's always at least one
idiot
> who ignores all the warnings, usually before the flooding situation
is
> over, and they start reporting *that* immediately, and that's
usually
> enough to keep everyone else from being that sort of an idiot.  (If
> there are 2 or 3 such cases, they usually happen close enough
together
> that the first one hadn't made enough news outlets to have an impact
on
> the others.)
>
I just got home
 from work
a few minutes ago.
For about 40 minutes
I was stuck outdoors
in what amounted to tropical storm weather.
The wind was blowing very hard
and shifting direction constantly,
 with about 300 degrees of variation.
I was waiting for a tornado
to hit the Park'n'Ride
where I and eight or so others
unsuccessfully tried to avoid the rain.
Lots of thunder and lightning.
The squall lasted about a half hour
before it died down
into more or less normal rainstorms.
Of course
then all the streets are flooded
and traffic steeps
in the heat of windshield defrosters.
The coast is really a great place
to see some awe inspiring storms.


xponent
Poet/Reporter Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Neanderthal (was: More on the environmental movement)

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 03:58 PM 5/11/04, Deborah Harrell wrote:
Perhaps I should have written what it made me
think of: a short story or article about how vampires
are the result of a viral infection...  :)


It's been done . . .



-- Ronn!  :)


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Neanderthal (was: More on the environmental movement)

[Deborah Harrell]

> Gary Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The Fool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> From: Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> >> 

 Now I'll have to go back and check for that - 

> > "Indeed, Neanderthal skeletons resemble cretins
far
> >> more closely than they resemble healthy modern
> >> humans," Dobson wrote in the journal article.
> >> "Conversely, cretin skeletons resemble
> Neanderthals
> >> more closely than they resemble healthy modern
> > humans..."

> > Sorry but no.  They have sequenced the
> mitochondrial DNA from at least 3
> > specimens.  They weren't human.  Period.

I didn't know that about the DNA.  Have to read that
sometime.
 
> I will add this is another case of a scientist
> wandering outside his
> field.  He has no training in biology, medicine or
> anthropology.

I believe I *did* say that his opinions were
controversial, and the article certainly made clear
that he wasn't a biologist -- I still thought it was
fun!  Perhaps I should have written what it made me
think of: a short story or article about how vampires
are the result of a viral infection...  :)

Debbi
Needs To Make Her Humor More Obvious Maru




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: [L3] Re: Scouted: Protecting Creation on Earth Day

[Deborah Harrell]

> Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> OK, Yahoo is truncating messages again, so I can't
> quote Debbi.  Damn.  We appear to agree that the
> charges against the Bush Administration about
> mercury have been vastly exaggerated.  

I'd disagree with the "vastly" - as I posted, "A close
examination of the [EPA] draft proposal,
however, reveals that by emphasizing a cap-and-trade
program, Leavitt was trying to deflect attention from
the heart of the proposal: It would downgrade mercury
from being regulated as a "hazardous" pollutant to one
that requires less stringent pollution controls. By
doing so, EPA's "cap" would allow nearly seven times
more annual mercury emissions for five times longer
than current law."
 
> I
> think I'm being fair in paraphrasing her concluding
> thought by saying that she suggests that in the
> conclusion to my last message I was lumping together
> extremists and the mainstream environmental movement
> in talking about the banning of DDT.  
> 
> My rebuttal to that argument is simple - no one uses
> DDT anymore.  Basically no one in the world.  If
> it's only the extremsists, how come they won so
> completely?

Question: how does the US ban of DDT prevent any other
country from making it?

>  Everyone knew - without any doubt whatsoever,
> _everyone knew_ - that banning DDT would cause a
> massive spike in malaria worldwide.  It was
> nonetheless banned, and malaria did spike.  90+% of
> the people in the world who have died of malaria
> since
> DDT was banned _died because DDT was banned_. 

Do you have a site handy for that figure?  (If not,
I'll try to find it at some point.)

Debbi




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Nick Arnett]

Travis Edmunds wrote:


This is funny. Yes, it is decidedly unchristian to give much thought to 
people who *sin*, or to people of other religions (meaning that every 
religion is THE religion) going to Hell, Hades, the 'fiery deeps', or 
whatever you want to call it. Although...on second thought I will call 
it Hell as we are after all talking about Christianity. Anyway, my point 
is this - the actual belief that sinners and everyone else who for 
whatever reason cannot make it into Heaven (supposedly most go to 
Purgatory) is a key part of Christian dogma.
No, that's a part of church-ianity dogma.  Christ taught quite the 
opposite -- that God loves us in our failures.  It seems that many 
churches only give lip service to the unconditional love that the Bible 
illustrates in parable after parable.  Instead the message comes out 
that you must repent before you can be forgiven, which is backwards from 
the gospel.

The good news is that we are acceptable to God exactly as we are. 
Jesus' harshest words were for the self-righteous, who rejected that idea.

Nick (addicted to self-righteousness, but doing better all the time)

--
Nick Arnett
Director, Business Intelligence Services
LiveWorld Inc.
Phone/fax: (408) 551-0427
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: March for Women's Lives

[Julia Thompson]

"Horn, John" wrote:
> 
> > From: Julia Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Actually, in the original post, that poster misattributed
> something to
> > Mr. Lee, something that was mine.  Maybe he's just spreading the
> joy.
> > Or maybe he misread "jmh" as "Jim".
> 
> I did?  Ghah!  I did.  Sorry about that.  It was your comment I was
> replying to, didn't mean to do that.
> 
>  - jmh

You didn't do it -- someone else just quoted your quote of what I said. 
Then even misattributed *that*.  :)

Julia

Not Your Fault Maru
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Travis Edmunds]

From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out
Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 20:48:50 -0500
I don't think that most Christians give much thought to the chances of
others winning a one way trip to the fiery deeps because for one
thing, it is decidedly unchristian to do so.
This is funny. Yes, it is decidedly unchristian to give much thought to 
people who *sin*, or to people of other religions (meaning that every 
religion is THE religion) going to Hell, Hades, the 'fiery deeps', or 
whatever you want to call it. Although...on second thought I will call it 
Hell as we are after all talking about Christianity. Anyway, my point is 
this - the actual belief that sinners and everyone else who for whatever 
reason cannot make it into Heaven (supposedly most go to Purgatory) is a key 
part of Christian dogma.

 Organized religion is hypocrisy at it's finest.


Of course there is a minority who feel a strong affinity for the grand
drama of the Old Testament and who will use any means fair or foul to
save souls ( and in some cases fill coffers) as part and parcel of the
ouvre of radical evangelism.
That doesn't sound radical to me. On the contrary, it sounds like the smooth 
running of the gears in the Church of Rome (catholicism). Of course the bit 
about the Old Testament specifically, is spot on. At least in Catholic 
circles, as it is taught that the Old Testament is not to be taken 
literally.

-Travis "birds-eye view"

_
MSN Premium helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: March for Women's Lives

[Horn, John]

> From: Julia Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Actually, in the original post, that poster misattributed
something to
> Mr. Lee, something that was mine.  Maybe he's just spreading the
joy. 
> Or maybe he misread "jmh" as "Jim".

I did?  Ghah!  I did.  Sorry about that.  It was your comment I was
replying to, didn't mean to do that.

 - jmh
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: March for Women's Lives

[Horn, John]

> From: Jim Sharkey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Mike Lee misattributed to me:
> >>As my brother-in-law (a stay at home dad*) put it having one
> >>kid is a hobby, adding a second makes it a career.  It
> >> definitely gets exponentially harder with the second one.
> >
> >That is so dumb. It does not.
> 
> You're the only person I've ever encountered who thinks so.  
> 
> I don't remember who quoted this to you, but it wasn't me.  None
of 
> my brothers-in-law even have kids.  I understand that your 
> bizarre hard-on for me makes you *want* me to engage you 
> further, but I 
> weasn't.  In any case, I can be fairly accused of various 
> shortcomings, but a lack of parenting experience is not among
them.

You know I was sort of expecting a comment that 1 to any power is
still 1.

 - jmh
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: March for Women's Lives

[Horn, John]

> From: Mike Lee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>   Jim, lacking parenting experience:
> 
> > As my brother-in-law (a stay at home dad*) put it having one 
> > kid is a hobby, adding a second makes it a career.  It 
> > definitely gets exponentially harder with the second one.
> 
> That is so dumb. It does not. And it's probably not what he 
> meant anyway.

Actually, it was me who wrote that.  And I *do* have 2 kids so I
know exactly what he meant (although I am not a stay-at-home
father).  Also, as I've discussed it with him, I think I know what
he meant better than you.  Thanks though.

 - jmh
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Just For Fun - Some Odd Pictures...

[Travis Edmunds]

From: "Nick Lidster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Killer Bs Discussion'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Just For Fun - Some Odd Pictures...
Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 12:15:39 -0230
Yeh there are some good ones
I like the first 'shadow people' one. Creepy...

though the "tube clouds" I don't know
about you but here we get them often with a series of windy days with
wind speeds avg. 50kph and gusts to 80kph
Yeah, we get them 'here' as well. Imagine that!

Anyway, now is as good a time as any to introduce Nick, who is a good friend 
of mine and who incidentally, lives just down the street from me.

-Travis "two ole Newfies" Edmunds

_
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: heavy rains, floodwater

[Julia Thompson]

Kevin Tarr wrote:
> 
> Sunday night in SOUTH central PA there was a train of thunderstorms, a line
> that pops up over the same area and moves in the direction of the storm
> front, instead of tracking perpendicular. Estimates say there was 6+ inches
> in four hours in some places. But from a different source estimates from
> Doppler radar can be high when hail is in a storm, usually doubling the
> actual amount that fell.
> 
> Sadly two people died in the flood waters from the storm. But only one
> story stated that the person drove onto a bridge already covered with
> water. While I have sympathy for the dead, every story should be stating
> the wrong decision that lead to the deaths instead of ignoring it.
> 
> Kevin T. - VRWC
> News you can use

They're not playing that up?

Around here, whenever there's a storm system leading to flooding, every
media outlet I'm aware of warns everyone not to drive over bridges
covered with water.  Repeatedly.  And there's always at least one idiot
who ignores all the warnings, usually before the flooding situation is
over, and they start reporting *that* immediately, and that's usually
enough to keep everyone else from being that sort of an idiot.  (If
there are 2 or 3 such cases, they usually happen close enough together
that the first one hadn't made enough news outlets to have an impact on
the others.)

One other thing I've noticed is that at least some of the local stations
will report on who was wearing seatbelts when there was a really nasty
automobile accident, and it usually turns out that the folks who were
wearing seatbelts suffered less serious injuries than those who
weren't.  Of course, depending on how badly a car has been squished,
that's not always enough -- but all things being equal, it seems that
seat belts can make a big difference in how bad injuries are.  And
letting people know that it's not just the state law, but could make a
difference in your quality of life immediately following an accident,
that's not a bad thing.

Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: Just For Fun - Some Odd Pictures...

[Nick Lidster]

Yeh there are some good ones, though the "tube clouds" I don't know
about you but here we get them often with a series of windy days with
wind speeds avg. 50kph and gusts to 80kph
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: What America Does with its Hegemony

[Andrew Paul]

From: Dan Minette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 


>> I don't agree with Andrew completely.  For instance the pre-emptive strike
>> by Israel in the Seven Day War was justified.

Thats a tricky one, to be honest I don't know enough about it to comment.
Taking a premptive strike, like if the French had launched an attack hours before
the Germans invaded in 1940, to gain a strategic advantage over an enemy poised to 
invade
and essentially already at war, I would not view that as "starting" a war. The balance 
of strenght is 
also relevant. I am not opposed to defensive wars, they are unfortunate but beyond 
ones control
really. Its wars of agression that you dont start.

For any who wish to cast this as the situation in Iraq, with TWAT as the war already
declared, I would seek three bits of info. 1) Where were the poised Iraqi Armies
about to invade America, or England, or Australia et al. 2) Where is the evidence
that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11 etc, ie that he was at war with any of the 
above.
3)Even if both the above were true, what sort of evidence do we have that America
was in any way threated by Iraq.

>> It becomes more obvious every day however, that the invasion of Iraq was
>> unjustified, ill advised and poorly executed (not withstanding the
>> effectiveness of the military whose initial performance was exemplary.)

>OK, you put brackets on your opinion, which I appreciate.  But, let me
>explore it further.  Was our intervention in Bosnia acceptable?  Should we
>have stopped the genocide in Rwanda?  Our hands are full, but should
>somebody stop what's going on in Sudan?  What about my position.  If
>Hussein was sill killing people by the tens of thousands per year after we
>had a success in Afghanistan, and the sanctions were working no better,
>would it have been justified?

I dont think Bosnia or Rwanda were/would have been starting wars. 
Both were civil wars as I see them, in which one, with the full support
of the UN, one could justify intervention to end them, not to start them.
Afghanistan is a little more complex, but I can see that as a legitimate 
response to an attack. The war started on 9/11, and it was clear that
the Taliban were a party to it. I dont think that was starting a war,
and it had the tacit backing of the world community.

>The lack of preparation by the Bush administration clearly was a factor in
>my believing the war in Iraq was unwise.  But, I don't think there is
>anything inherently wrong with overturning a genocidal dictator.
 
There should be, in my opinion (and I think Doug discusses this above)
some sort of body to make these decisions. The UN is flawed, in many ways,
but it does have the only claim to being a world government. And even it would
not "start wars", it would reluctantly undertake interventions in countries that
had gone beyond the limit of what was agreed by the world as being acceptable 
behaviour. That would not be an easy judgement, and lots of stalling and politics
would go on, and lots of indecision, but thats how it should be. Rwanda, Bosnia
and a few others would fall into the category of places that one would intervene in.
Perhaps, eventually, Iraq would have too, once all other avenues had been fully 
explored.
 
Soverign nations dont start wars with other soverign nations. Wars are forced upon you,
not undertaken cos it seems like a good idea at the time.
 
Anyway, moral issues aside, I just thought it was a stupid idea to invade Iraq.
 
Ohh, I got bitten by an insect ! Hey look there is a bee's nest, lets go and
poke a stick in it and swirl it about a bit, that will stop it happening again.
Sure.. great idea guys.
 
Andrew
 

 


 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: A Fable

[Andrew Paul]

From: The Fool [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

><>

>A Fable
>by Stirling Newberry


>Stirling Newberry is an advisor to the Jim Newberry campaign. The
>opinions expressed here are his own.

>Prolog

>When, after the Second World War, one young Jewish reporter wanted to
>know who was responsible for the genocides that we now call the
>Holocaust.

I wrote a not disimilar thing as a poem just before the Iraq war bombing started.
I post it here in the full knowledge that it is probably crap, but its on topic
 
 
It didn't miss by much.

About the length of a football field,
They could have run it, even carrying the baby,
in the time it takes to microwave a burger.
That's if they had seen it coming.

Some wanted to blame the Pilot,
A blonde-haired boy from Utah,
Who wanted to be Tom Cruise.
But he just flew the plane.

The Bombardier, perhaps it was him
But then, even East LA never
Had shit this heavy going down. He did his best.
It was all automated anyway.

Perhaps it was the General,
I mean, he signed their orders.
But then he was enforcing a strategic imperative.
It was a good plan, despite the collateral damage.

The President?
Well, he was defending the free world.
Sure, he gave the command, but if he hadn't,
Hell, who knows what could have happened.

So, who else is there? The Dictator?
But his men were firing the AA guns,
Trying to shoot the plane down
before it even got there.

Perhaps it was some Programmer,
Too many late nights and pizzas.
Thought it was just another video game.
Nah, he didn't believe it was going to happen anyway.

The Defence Contractor,
Geez, he was just making an honest buck.
He wasn't to know it was going to be so dusty, or so hot.
Anyway, he was on the golf course at the time.

Or should we blame the Secret Agent?,
I mean, he set the SOB up in the first place,
But then he was a good guy back then,
An invaluable ally even.

And me, why are you looking at me?
Nothing to do with me,
I e-mailed all my friends
And told them I hated the war.

So, maybe it was them. I mean,
They were the only ones there.
If the kid had paid more attention,
Like I said, they coulda run away.

Not that it really matters I suppose,
No one who knows them survived anyway,
So there really is no-one left,
To point the finger of blame.

And anyway.

It didn't miss by much.

Andrew

 

___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

RE: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out

[Horn, John]

> From: Robert Seeberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> Untrue John.
> Christian describes a multitude of varying forms of belief.
> Southern Baptists are just one brand on the shelf.
> 
> Frex...and correct me if I am wrong, but Catholics are a
larger
> set of Christians in America than Southern Baptists.
> Though I will grant you that Southern Baptists may be louder
> concerning their beliefs and more forceful in regards to making
their
> environment conform to their religious beliefs.
> But in no way do I see Southern Baptists as the stereotype for all
> Christians.
> Fundamentalists perhaps..

I know all that.  I never meant to say that Baptists were
representative of all Christians.  Far from it.  In my experience,
if you ask someone who isn't a Baptist what religion they are they
will say "Presbyterian" or "Episcopal" or "Catholic".  Or if they
are asking you, they will say something like "what church to you go
to?" or something like that.  A Baptist will ask "Are you a
Christian?"  And they don't appear to include any of the above.

  - jmh
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Re: Calorie reduction redux

[Ronn!Blankenship]

At 05:06 AM 5/11/04, Kevin Tarr wrote:
The Dr. Roy Walford, the main proponent of CR, died April 27 from 
respiratory failure and complications from ALS, Amyotrophic Lateral 
Sclerosis. He was 79.

I read the LA times story. He believed he got ALS from Biosphere 2. They 
had high levels of nitrogen and were oxygen starved many times. Still, 
that was in 1993. The average lifespan after someone is diagnosed with ALS 
is 5 years. The story doesn't say when he first learned he had it.


Of course, that is only an average, and some people live with it much 
longer than that average, most notably Stephen Hawking . . .



-- Ronn!  :)


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Not All Bad

[Robert Seeberger]

http://www.drudgereport.com/iiraq.htm

Here's an image you will not see in the NEW YORKER or on 60 MINUTES:

An American soldier welcomed as a hero in Iraq!

As the world's satellites and printing presses await fresh images of
troop horrors and abuse, soldiers on the ground e-mailed this snap of
warm greetings from some of Iraq's women and children.



xponent
Linked Maru
rob


___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

heavy rains, floodwater

[Kevin Tarr]

Sunday night in SOUTH central PA there was a train of thunderstorms, a line 
that pops up over the same area and moves in the direction of the storm 
front, instead of tracking perpendicular. Estimates say there was 6+ inches 
in four hours in some places. But from a different source estimates from 
Doppler radar can be high when hail is in a storm, usually doubling the 
actual amount that fell.

Sadly two people died in the flood waters from the storm. But only one 
story stated that the person drove onto a bridge already covered with 
water. While I have sympathy for the dead, every story should be stating 
the wrong decision that lead to the deaths instead of ignoring it.

Kevin T. - VRWC
News you can use
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Calorie reduction redux

[Kevin Tarr]

The Dr. Roy Walford, the main proponent of CR, died April 27 from 
respiratory failure and complications from ALS, Amyotrophic Lateral 
Sclerosis. He was 79.

I read the LA times story. He believed he got ALS from Biosphere 2. They 
had high levels of nitrogen and were oxygen starved many times. Still, that 
was in 1993. The average lifespan after someone is diagnosed with ALS is 5 
years. The story doesn't say when he first learned he had it.

Kevin T. - VRWC
Not in the news 
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l