Re: Writing software
On Jun 13, 2005, at 5:12 AM, G. D. Akin wrote: I'm sure this has come up before, but what software is there out there that can help you manage versions. As I get further into my English program, I find that I'm having a hard time keeping track of what's what and when I wrote what when? Low- and no-cost preferred but I am interested in all. It's evening now, so I've put a little thought into this, and can offer the following thoughts while I wait to learn a little more about your environment... First of all, I learned a new term this week -- Yak Shaving: "Any seemingly pointless activity which is actually necessary to solve a problem which solves a problem which, several levels of recursion later, solves the real problem you're working on." Your pursuit of version control (or, more accurately in the field of writing, "revision control") for your English program may result in yak shaving. In software development, version control is something of a sub-industry, and opinions about version control platforms are a little like text editor or operating system religious wars. Among open source software developers, there are two favorites: subversion (aka svn) and CVS, which subversion was developed to replace. Going back in history, there's also rcs, and on Solaris, sccs, which I grew up on. In the commercial world, there's Perforce (which we use where I work and I find a little odd) and Rational's ClearCase. I doubt you want to go that route. The reason I went down that particular digression is that I was about to suggest that you look into svn, but upon reading up on the popular RapidSVN front-end to svn, it occurred to me that you'd be doing a fair bit of installation and configuration of stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with your English program in order to get where you want to go... Hence, the Yak Shaving. By the way, this may be the story that gives the origin of the phrase "Yak Shaving": I want to wax the car today. Oops, the hose is still broken from the winter. I'll need to buy a new one at Home Depot. But Home Depot is on the other side of the Tappan Zee bridge and getting there without my EZPass is miserable because of the tolls. But, wait! I could borrow my neighbor's EZPass... Bob won't lend me his EZPass until I return the mooshi pillow my son borrowed, though. And we haven't returned it because some of the stuffing fell out and we need to get some yak hair to restuff it. And the next thing you know, you're at the zoo, shaving a yak, all so you can wax your car. Back in the days of Mac OS 9 or earlier, I had a nice system extension that added version control to any application -- it modified the save dialog so that you could either replace the current version, save as a new version, or revert to an older version, all within the same file. Pretty cool. Don't know if there's anything like that for OS X, if that's your poison. Peace, Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Writing software
G. D. Akin wrote: I'm sure this has come up before, but what software is there out there that can help you manage versions. As I get further into my English program, I find that I'm having a hard time keeping track of what's what and when I wrote what when? Low- and no-cost preferred but I am interested in all. As someone else pointed it, it depends on what word processor you are using. Microsoft Word has limited change tracking functionality (track changes made in a single session and accept or reject them; or compare two word documents for differences). The current default .DOC format is an ugly binary format, so intelligent version tracking of those files is near impossible. You can use version tracker like a source revision system but beware that it is going to be non-optimal (VC systems are text-oriented and thus do odd things with binary formats) and you won't be able to use some of the more useful tools (diff the changes between far versions) without extracting from the VC and using Word for the task. For other formats (ASCII, LaTeX/BibTex, or XML-based formats) you should have no trouble using a source control system (just because the primary usage is for source code doesn't mean you can't use it for writing). If you want an easy to use (and free speech/beer) VC, let me suggest Darcs (www.darcs.net). It really is the simplest out there currently and should work well for you. -- --Max Battcher-- http://www.worldmaker.net/ Support Open/Free Mythoi: Read the manifesto @ mythoi.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: Forget global warming, let's make a difference
- Original Message - From: "David Brin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 7:14 PM Subject: Re: Brin: Forget global warming, let's make a difference > > > --- Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Lomberg doesn't have anything against talking about > > the global warming > > problem. And I doubt he would say investing money to > > research solutions > > to global warming would be a waste. > > SHow me where he acknowledges any need to do anything > at all. http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2001/08/14/warming.pdf Third, we should realize that the cost of global warming will be substantial - about $5 trillion. Since cutting back CO2 emissions quickly turns very costly and easily counterproductive, we should focus more of our effort at finding ways of easing the emission of greenhouse gases over the long run. Partly, this means that we need to invest much more in research and development of solar power, fusion and other likely power sources of the future. Given a current US investment in renewable energy research and development of just $200 million, a considerable increase would seem a promising investment to achieve a possible conversion to renewable energy towards the latter part of the century. Partly, this also means that we should be much more open towards other techno-fixes (so-called geoengineering). These suggestions range from fertilizing the ocean (making more algae bind carbon when they die and fall to the ocean floor) and putting sulfur particles into the stratosphere (cooling the earth) to capturing CO2 from fossil fuel use and returning it to storage in geological formations.30 Again, if one of these approaches could indeed mitigate (part of) CO2 emissions or global warming, this would be of tremendous value to the world. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: Forget global warming, let's make a difference
--- Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lomberg doesn't have anything against talking about > the global warming > problem. And I doubt he would say investing money to > research solutions > to global warming would be a waste. SHow me where he acknowledges any need to do anything at all. His armwavings serve one function, to say "all right, we won't deny it's happening anymore. So now let's lazily mozey down to the bunk house and snooze a bit then jaw a little about it, tomorrow." I refuse to accept that we must choose between huge problems to address. We are vastly rich and capable. We have proved again and again that we can deal with multiple problems at the same time. Moreover, we must. Shall we employ a million biologists to cure AIDS and NOT employ a million engineers to improve energy efficiency? Excuse me? There's a tradeoff here? Not one that I can see. Our descendants will judge us according to the things we neglected and fires we did NOT put out. Nuts. If someone > comes up with an > effective solution to global warming that is cost > competitive with other > solutions to important world problems, then I am > sure that Lomberg would > be all for it. Show me a scintilla of evidence that he is inclined to do this. His statements all manifest as attacks upon the reasonableness of the vast majority of esteemed scientists, never does he pose a rank order of carbon palliating measures that either (according to him) make sense or do not. That is what a person would do if he were the reasonable fellow you portray Lomberg to be. He never even tries. His sole effect is to attack the credibility of all people who want to address this problem with any urgency. > > Shilling for the neocons? Feh. You have conspiracy > theory on the brain, > Brin. The shoe fits. These monsters have most of the world's media shilling for them. Nu? feudalists did that in most human cultures. We should be surprised they are doing it now? db ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: Forget global warming, let's make a difference
* David Brin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Unbelievable. There is AIDS in the world, so let's NOT talk about > other problems. By all means let us only take on the priorities > listed by his Copenhagen Consensus. Never consider that the great > Academies of Science may have reached a consensus that the Earth is in > danger for good reason. > > feh. Lomberg is smarter and better than Crichton and the worst > neocons. That only makes his shilling for them even more shameful. Wow, David, I wonder if someone could totally miss the point more. Yes, many scientists agree that there is a global warming problem. _Lomberg_ himself agrees. That is not the issue Lomberg was addressing. The issue is whether we should spend resources implementing any of the currently proposed "solutions" to global warming. That is an economic question. We have limited resources. Where are these resources best spent? Certainly not on Kyoto. Lomberg doesn't have anything against talking about the global warming problem. And I doubt he would say investing money to research solutions to global warming would be a waste. If someone comes up with an effective solution to global warming that is cost competitive with other solutions to important world problems, then I am sure that Lomberg would be all for it. Shilling for the neocons? Feh. You have conspiracy theory on the brain, Brin. -- Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Brin: Forget global warming, let's make a difference
--- Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://tinyurl.com/aom39 > > http://www.money.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2005/06/13/ccpers13.xml&menuId=242&sSheet=/money/2005/06/13/ixfrontcity.html > > Personal view: Forget global warming. Let's make a > real difference > By Bjørn Lomborg (Filed: 13/06/2005) Yes, this is Lomberg, all right. Shilling for the ruling class. Unbelievable. There is AIDS in the world, so let's NOT talk about other problems. By all means let us only take on the priorities listed by his Copenhagen Consensus. Never consider that the great Academies of Science may have reached a consensus that the Earth is in danger for good reason. feh. Lomberg is smarter and better than Crichton and the worst neocons. That only makes his shilling for them even more shameful. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Brin: Forget global warming, let's make a difference
http://tinyurl.com/aom39 http://www.money.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2005/06/13/ccpers13.xml&menuId=242&sSheet=/money/2005/06/13/ixfrontcity.html Personal view: Forget global warming. Let's make a real difference By Bjørn Lomborg (Filed: 13/06/2005) Last Tuesday, 11 of the world's leading academies of science, including the Royal Society, told us that we must take global warming seriously. Their argument is that global warming is due to mankind's use of fossil fuels, that the consequences 100 years from now will be serious, and that we therefore should do something dramatic. We should make substantial and long-term reductions of greenhouse gases along the lines of the Kyoto Protocol. This is perhaps the strongest indication that well-meaning scientists have gone beyond their area of expertise and are conducting unsubstantiated politicking ahead of next month's meeting of the G8. Of course, as scientists, they should point out that fossil fuels will warm the world. This is indeed the majority opinion and likely to be true. Moreover, they should also tell us the likely impact of global warming over the coming century, which is likely to have fairly serious consequences, mainly for developing nations. But to inform us accurately they have to go further than that. They should tell us what will happen even if we implement the fairly draconian measures of Kyoto - which they curiously do not. They do not tell us that even if all the industrial nations agreed to the cuts (about 30pc from what would otherwise have been by 2010), and stuck to them all through the century, the impact would simply be to postpone warming by about six years beyond 2100. The unfortunate peasant in Bangladesh will find that his house floods in 2106 instead. Moreover, they should also tell what they expect the cost of the Kyoto Protocol to be. That may not come easy to natural scientists, but there is plenty of literature on the subject, and the best guess is that the cost of doing a very little good for the third world 100 years from now would be $150billion per year for the rest of this century. Even after the Brown/Blair exertions to extract more aid for Africa, the West spends about $60billion helping the third world. One has to consider whether the proportions are right here. This brings us to the strongest evidence that the national academies are acting in a political rather than scientific and informational manner. Why do they only talk about climate politics? Surely this is not the only important issue with a considerable science component? What about the challenge of HIV/Aids? What about malaria, malnutrition, agricultural research, water, sanitation, education, civil conflicts, financial instability, trade and subsidies? The list goes on. What is more than curious is that the national academies have not found it necessary to tell the politicians that solutions to these many problems should be top priorities too. Even the host of the G8, Tony Blair, has recognised that the problems of Africa should also be a top priority. Of course, this is because one cannot talk about top priorities from a natural science perspective. What we should do first depends on the economics of where we can do the most good for the resources we spend. Some of the world's most distinguished economists - including three Nobel laureates - answered this question at the Copenhagen Consensus last year, prioritising all major policies for improving the world. They found dealing with communicable diseases like Aids and malaria, malnutrition, free trade and clean drinking water were the world's top priorities. The experts rated urgent responses to climate change at the bottom. In fact, the panel called these ventures, including Kyoto, "bad projects", because they actually cost more than the good they do. Surely we can all agree that the G8 meeting should do the most good possible, but we already know that this does not mean dealing with just climate change. The national academies must stop playing politics and start providing their part of the necessary input to tackle the most urgent issues first. The urgent problem of the poor majority of this world is not climate change. Their problems are truly very basic: not dying from easily preventable diseases; not being malnourished from lack of simple nutrients; not being prevented from exploiting opportunities in the global economy by lack of free trade. So please, let us do the right things first. Bjørn Lomborg is the organiser of Copenhagen Consensus, adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School and author of The Skeptical Environmentalist ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Gulags
-Original Message- From: Ronn!Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Killer Bs Discussion Sent: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 00:22:00 -0500 Subject: Re: Gulags At 08:28 PM Sunday 6/12/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >In a message dated 6/11/2005 5:52:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > >How does procreation have to do with homosexual rape among prisoners and how > >to prevent it, which is what this discussion was originally about? We are animals (I mean that in no pejorative way). Our sex drive is an adaptation that insures that we will procreate. Men don't have sex to have babies directly but the drive for sex is founded in procreation. So the persons the men who want sex most are young men because this makes for more babies and they want to have sex with young women. With gay sex the object of diesire is changed but the diesire for youth is not -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Discovery Channel's "Greatest American"
-Original Message- From: Leonard Matusik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Killer Bs Discussion Sent: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:30:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Discovery Channel's "Greatest American" On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 21:19:22 -0400 "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If you think that's bad, the TV ads for the duimb thing mentioned Madonna. JDG _ How silly, Madonna belongs to the "Greatest Italians" club; doesn't she? I mean, she has that statue thingy set up in her home town and all? I think she should be greatest Jew __ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Writing software
G. D. Akin asked, ... what software is there out there that can help you manage versions. Try arch, specifically, Tom Lord's version written in C for speed, tla. Arch enables you to manage versions. I looked at it recently and wrote briefly about it for documents for people teaching lawyers remotely. See http://www.rattlesnake.com In particular, the Arch chapter in http://www.rattlesnake.com/open-editing/open-editing.html (and if you do not get it at Mon, 2005 Jun 13 21:15 UTC, please try again in a few minutes; I just called the hosting organization and my contact said there is someone working on its server.) That directory includes not only the HTML rendering for the Web but also the DVI, PDF, and PostScript renderings for printing, the Info for efficient online reading or listening, the plain text, and the Texinfo deep represention. tla is designed for easly dealing with multiple versions and looks much better than CVS. (I use CVS every day, but then, I am old. Even the people who wrote CVS think it is crufty.) tla is freely redistributable, so you pay a fair market price that does not depend on government police enforcement. (I.e., a CD with 650 megabytes on it should cost you US$1.50 - US$2.50; that price will provide the seller with enough to may for manufacturing, distribution, marketing, and profit.) As a practical matter, a competitive, free market for a `non-rivalrous' good, as economists say, means that if you download tla off the Internet, for example with an apt-get install tla command for Debian, it costs you nothing but the time of you and your equipment. -- Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8 http://www.rattlesnake.com http://www.teak.cc ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Writing software
George, I'm sure this has come up before, but what software is there out there that can help you manage versions. As I get further into my English program, I find that I'm having a hard time keeping track of what's what and when I wrote what when? Low- and no-cost preferred but I am interested in all. With what do you write? What word processor, what platform? Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: How the New York Times turned
Also see the current debates over the poor reporting - pushing the President's Social Security message by Robin Toner and David Rosenbaum's article on ageing. -- Gary Denton Easter Lemming Blogs http://elemming.blogspot.com http://elemming2.blogspot.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: How the New York Times turned
I should add that currenly according to the scholars at a liberal think tank the New York Times is trying to kill the Downing Street memo stories. http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=1079 On 6/13/05, Gary Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 6/11/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In a message dated 6/11/2005 11:20:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > huh- have you been reading the same paper I have been reading for the past > > few years. The Times has consistently argued that the Bush tax policy was > > and is > > a disaster. They have been a reasoned critic of his foreign policy and have > > against almost all of his domestic agenda > > They supported his Iraqi war and were a main conduit of the pro-war > propaganda. > > They repeatedly convey the misinformation of administration officials > while offering no or weak rebuttals. They are defending two > columnists who are the last available sources on who in the > administration was smearing and outing Valerie Plame, a deep cover CIA > agent preventing the spread of WMDs. Along with the Washington Post > they refused to run major articles on the extremists nominated for > judgeships until after the nominations were approved. > > They have been less supportive of Bush's social agenda being an > Eastern metro paper. > > For your specific objection on Bush's tax policy to cite just two: > : > New York Times. Bush's Tax Cut: The Best Boost For NY November 19, 2001 > > During the election they did no fact-checking but simply reported each > campaign's spin. Complained about here among other places. > http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=background.view&backgroundid=28 > > (You also might check out Brad DeLong's archives. You might also > check out the Daily Howler archives as he is frequently a critic of > the left as well as the right but a much of his work is the poor and > biased reporting at the Times. You might also add Talking Points Memo > to your online to read list.) > > This is why the rhetoric of their editorial was so noteworthy. Except > for a few cases they have been behind this administration and offered > mild criticisms. The last major opposition I found was over the > failure to include low-income taxpayers in those receiving an increase > in their child credit. > -- Gary Denton Easter Lemming Blogs http://elemming.blogspot.com http://elemming2.blogspot.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: How the New York Times turned
On 6/11/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In a message dated 6/11/2005 11:20:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > huh- have you been reading the same paper I have been reading for the past > few years. The Times has consistently argued that the Bush tax policy was and > is > a disaster. They have been a reasoned critic of his foreign policy and have > against almost all of his domestic agenda They supported his Iraqi war and were a main conduit of the pro-war propaganda. They repeatedly convey the misinformation of administration officials while offering no or weak rebuttals. They are defending two columnists who are the last available sources on who in the administration was smearing and outing Valerie Plame, a deep cover CIA agent preventing the spread of WMDs. Along with the Washington Post they refused to run major articles on the extremists nominated for judgeships until after the nominations were approved. They have been less supportive of Bush's social agenda being an Eastern metro paper. For your specific objection on Bush's tax policy to cite just two: : New York Times. Bush's Tax Cut: The Best Boost For NY November 19, 2001 During the election they did no fact-checking but simply reported each campaign's spin. Complained about here among other places. http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=background.view&backgroundid=28 (You also might check out Brad DeLong's archives. You might also check out the Daily Howler archives as he is frequently a critic of the left as well as the right but a much of his work is the poor and biased reporting at the Times. You might also add Talking Points Memo to your online to read list.) This is why the rhetoric of their editorial was so noteworthy. Except for a few cases they have been behind this administration and offered mild criticisms. The last major opposition I found was over the failure to include low-income taxpayers in those receiving an increase in their child credit. Gary Denton Easter Lemming Blogs http://elemming.blogspot.com http://elemming2.blogspot.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Gulags
- Original Message - From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 2:34 PM Subject: Re: Gulags On 6/13/05, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Killer Bs Discussion" > Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2005 9:27 AM > Subject: Re: Gulags > > Right away, I wanted to re-establish what the Geneva convention actually > says. > > > > >The Geneva Conventions does specify how to handle POWs and all other > >prisoners. > > The relevent section of the covention, from an earlier post of mine: > > > A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons > belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the > power > of the enemy: > > 1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as > members > of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. > > 2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, > including > those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the > conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this > territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, > including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following > conditions: > > (a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; > > (b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; > > (c) That of carrying arms openly; > > (d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and > customs of war. > > AQ doesn't qualify under these provisions. Particularly clear is the fact > that they do not comply with b. > > The Geneva convention is a treaty between governments. It does not cover > citizens of a country fighting in another country without clearly joining > the military or militia of that other country and demonstrating it by > wearing uniforms. > > Dan M. You are focusing on one section in several Geneva Conventions. I will repeat what I have above. >Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Additional >Protocol II apply to prisoners regardless of the status of the legal >standing of their organization. Common Article 3 also applies to >government clashes with armed insurgent groups. In the Geneva Convention of 1949, I find. Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are. That excludes virtually all of the members of AQ. I think if they were Iranian, they might be covered, so that's a reasonable point. I see the same clause in the 4th Geneva convention, so the protected person status there appears to be the same. If you see a contrary definition of a protected person from the one I listed, I'd like to know where it is. I tried to go to the obvious place to find these definitions, but I realize treaties can have things in not so obvious places. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Gulags
On 6/13/05, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Killer Bs Discussion"
> Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2005 9:27 AM
> Subject: Re: Gulags
>
> Right away, I wanted to re-establish what the Geneva convention actually
> says.
>
>
>
> >The Geneva Conventions does specify how to handle POWs and all other
> >prisoners.
>
> The relevent section of the covention, from an earlier post of mine:
>
>
> A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons
> belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the
> power
> of the enemy:
>
> 1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as
> members
> of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
>
> 2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps,
> including
> those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the
> conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this
> territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps,
> including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following
> conditions:
>
> (a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
>
> (b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
>
> (c) That of carrying arms openly;
>
> (d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and
> customs of war.
>
> AQ doesn't qualify under these provisions. Particularly clear is the fact
> that they do not comply with b.
>
> The Geneva convention is a treaty between governments. It does not cover
> citizens of a country fighting in another country without clearly joining
> the military or militia of that other country and demonstrating it by
> wearing uniforms.
>
> Dan M.
You are focusing on one section in several Geneva Conventions. I will
repeat what I have above.
Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Additional
Protocol II apply to prisoners regardless of the status of the legal
standing of their organization. Common Article 3 also applies to
government clashes with armed insurgent groups.
In addition the 4th Geneva Convention ("Geneva Convention relative to
the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War") lays out separate
protections for civilians, including so-called "unlawful combatants."
Article 4 of the 3rd Geneva Convention sets out six distinct
categories of prisoners whom the convention defines as POWs.
--
Gary Denton
Easter Lemming Blogs
http://elemming.blogspot.com
http://elemming2.blogspot.com
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Gulags
- Original Message - From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2005 9:27 AM Subject: Re: Gulags Right away, I wanted to re-establish what the Geneva convention actually says. >The Geneva Conventions does specify how to handle POWs and all other >prisoners. The relevent section of the covention, from an earlier post of mine: A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy: 1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces. 2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: (a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; (b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; (c) That of carrying arms openly; (d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. AQ doesn't qualify under these provisions. Particularly clear is the fact that they do not comply with b. The Geneva convention is a treaty between governments. It does not cover citizens of a country fighting in another country without clearly joining the military or militia of that other country and demonstrating it by wearing uniforms. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Gulags
On 6/10/05, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > - Original Message - > From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On 6/9/05, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > > From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Dr. Cole is right. > > > > IMHO, he amplifies and mirrors one of the worst tendencies of the Bush > > administration: seeing adversaries as evil incarnate and not willing to > > believe that their viewpoints can be opposed, except by evil. > > > >We disagree. > > >I don't see him as amplifying that administration trait. The prison at > Guantanamo was > >expressly set up to circumvent laws the US had on how to treat prisoners, > POWs and > >other combatants. > > That isn't clear to me. What is clear to me is that they didn't want the > complication of bringing prisoners taken in a war into the United States. > Let's look back at a few wars. It is clear that the general Viet Cong > (Nam), Chinese (Korea), German or Japanese (WWII) prisoners would be > covered by the Geneva convention, but no one was arguing that they had a > right to either a trial under the US court system or quick release. > Further, there was summary justice practiced in Europe with lower level > German officers found guilty of war crimes. I think it would be useful to > see what the rules as well as the practices were in past wars. > > So, IMHO, going to Gitmo was initially defendable. Some of the prisoners > (AQ) > were clearly not protected by the Geneva Conventions. That was fairly well > established on list at the time, by reference to the conventions. If you > look at what was expected by a number of people, military trials within a > few months, and then sentencing, it was not inherently unreasonable. The Geneva Conventions does specify how to handle POWs and all other prisoners. There was a campaign by the administration to deny this and to deny that sections of our uniform military code of justice applied. This recommendation by the administration and the White House was vigorously protested by experienced State Department and senior military JAG officials. I know of no one who thought that these prisoners would be held just a few months until military trials but I will admit I didn't ask you. >That didn't happen. The administration now has prisoners there for 2.5 > years, and seems most willing to hold most of them indefinitely without > trial. I think they are caught, having prisoners that they are sure will > return to fighting the United States if released, but without sufficient > evidence of criminal activity to convict, even in a military court. Their justification is, at least, slightly based in reality. There is a > war on terrorism, and they have caught AQ unlawful combatants in this war. > They have the right to hold them until the war is over. This is totally preposterous. This war on a vague dangerous sounding noun will last how long? Dr. Cole is correct, what you are arguing is that a class of people should be held indefinitely without trial. This is known as a bill of attainder and is expressly forbidden by Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution. The difficulty with this rational is obvious. While the adversary(ies) we > are facing are not simply criminals...they have had many of the resources > available to nations at their disposal, the war on terror is not fixed in > place and time as older wars have been. So, these men could be held until > they die of old age because of the vague boundaries involved in the war on > terror. > > I consider this wrong. But, I consider the idea that AQ is just a bunch of > criminals that should be left to the courts to be wrong. I think we are in > a new type of situationone in which the rules need to be worked out. > None of the old templates work. Hyperbola doesn't help this process. OK, you do recognize the problems with this. However, your dismissal of "the courts", not even recognizing the difference between military justice and the right demonized "liberal court system" is troubling to me. IMHO you also seem to be remiss in claiming this is a unique situation. Many wars are not between governments with fixed boundaries. >The administration set out to get and obtained from their lawyers advise > >that the Geneva Accords were "quaint" and that the president was entitled > >to authorize torture if he felt it necessary. > > IIRC, the question was more limited. It was whether the US president would > have to forgo state trips to Europe because violations of the Geneva > convention would be an arresting offence when he was there. The answer was > no. It is somewhat germane, because a Spanish judge is looking at charging > the American servicemen who fired a round into a hotel that they > mistakenly > thought was the source of shots fired at them. This is a somewhat distorted argument IMHO. Gonzales was writing trying to find some means that agents of the government violating the G
Re: Gulags
On 6/11/05, Ronn!Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 03:38 PM Saturday 6/11/2005, Robert Seeberger wrote: > >Dan Minette wrote: > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> Ronn!Blankenship wrote: > > >>> At 11:31 PM Friday 6/10/2005, Dan Minette wrote: > >[snip] > > > >One of the things that is done with regularity at Gitmo (according to > >one our Congresspersons who was *allowed* to visit there), is tying a > >prisoner down till he defecates and urinates on himself and then > >leaving him there for 18 - 24 hours. > > > >This is supposed to deliver intelligence to our Mil/Int services. > > > >But I see no valid comparisons between the abuses of our penal system > >and the way political prisoners are handled at Gitmo and the other > >places where Americans are paid to leave their humanity at the door. > > > Without making excuses or attempting to justify any abuses in either prison > system, I did make a point in a post to another list earlier today in > response to a reference to the alleged desecration of the Qu'ran at > Gitmo: whatever else we may have done there, we at least have made > provision for Muslim prisoners we are holding to exercise their religion by > allowing them to have copies of their holy book, by giving them something > to use as a prayer rug and allowing them to pray, by giving them meals > which meet their religious dietary restrictions, etc. I have not heard > that the Muslims have, frex, provided captured Christians with Bibles or > captured Jews with yarmulkes, or otherwise facilitated them in their > exercise of their religions. (If I am incorrect in that, I would > appreciate correction.) And whatever we may have done as far as abuse or > mistreatment of prisoners at Gitmo, I have not heard of us kidnapping known > non-combatants such as aid workers and posting video of their decapitation > on the Internet . . . I am sure you are not meaning to say that our standard of treatment only has to meet the standard of barbarians. So by this standard as long as we don't torture people to death or take pictures of it we are doing OK. As it is the incident I posted, one of several available, of torturing people to death. Part of the humiliation interrogation technique was taking photos. We are outsourcing some cases to places where torture is more practiced. Surprisingly one of those was Syria which tortured a Canadian for several weeks after the US shipped him in there before concluding he was innocent. Syria has since stopped participating in our information gathering. So even by the lowest possible standards are we doing OK? I do not want the US ttreatment to be the new minimum standard of decency. -- Gary Denton Easter Lemming Blogs http://elemming.blogspot.com http://elemming2.blogspot.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Discovery Channel's "Greatest American"
On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 14:32:47 -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote > I was wondering that myself. Gates hasn't invented anything, ever; > and he's never distributed or marketed anything that had never been > seen before either. He's just got excellent PR. Permit me to disagree... Bill excels at packaging. By "packaging," I mean taking inventions and figuring out how to wrap them up so that they are very, very popular. He's focused on market share and always has been, above all else -- what will get the maximum number of people to buy product X? To me, he's the Aldus Manutius of software. The Aldine Press, as you may know, was the first great publishing company. What did they publish? Other peoples' writings -- the classics. Aldus' innovation was to create the quarto and octavo, making books appealing to larger numbers of people. In those days, it was very expensive to re-set type, so that each edition contained new errata pages... which tended to become larger than the original volumes, since there were so many bugs, er, typos, in the originals. Does this sound like Windows and service packs? Bill's form of brilliance tends to be underestimated. I used to. But having see so many Silicon Valley companies with good technology fail because they don't put much value on packaging for market share, I came to appreciate what he brings to the party. At the same time, to use a cliche, it ain't pretty. Steve Jobs' sense of aesthetics beats Bill's every time. Apple's insistence on elegance has cost it market share; Microsoft insistence on market share has cost it elegance. I'm glad we have both. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voicemail: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Sci-fi writers look ahead
On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:20:11 GMT, narnett wrote > ___ > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l How very sad... That one of one those "mail this article" links... Oh, well. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voicemail: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
American religion
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na- lostboys13jun13,0,5219104.story?page=1&coll=la-home-headlines http://tinyurl.com/c8vls "ST. GEORGE, Utah — Abandoned by his family, faith and community, Gideon Barlow arrived here an orphan from another world. At first, he played the tough guy, aloof and hard. But when no one was watching, he would cry. The freckle-faced 17-year-old said he was left to fend for himself last year after being forced out of Colorado City, Ariz., a town about 40 miles east of here, just over the state line. "I couldn't see how my mom would let them do what they did to me," he said. When he tried to visit her on Mother's Day, he said, she told him to stay away. When he begged to give her a present, she said she wanted nothing. "I am dead to her now," he said. Gideon is one of the "Lost Boys," a group of more than 400 teenagers — some as young as 13 — who authorities in Utah and Arizona say have fled or been driven out of the polygamous enclaves of Hildale, Utah, and Colorado City over the last four years. His stated offenses: wearing short-sleeved shirts, listening to CDs and having a girlfriend. Other boys say they were booted out for going to movies, watching television and staying out past curfew. Some say they were sometimes given as little as two hours' notice before being driven to St. George or nearby Hurricane, Utah, and left like unwanted pets along the road. Authorities say the teens aren't really being expelled for what they watch or wear, but rather to reduce competition for women in places where men can have dozens of wives. "It's a mathematical thing. If you are marrying all these girls to one man, what do you do with all the boys?" said Utah Atty. Gen. Mark Shurtleff, who has had boys in his office crying to see their mothers. "People have said to me: 'Why don't you prosecute the parents?' But the kids don't want their parents prosecuted; they want us to get the No. 1 bad guy — Warren Jeffs. He is chiefly responsible for kicking out these boys." The 49-year-old Jeffs is the prophet, or leader, of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The FLDS, as it is known, controls Hildale and Colorado City. The sect, which broke from the Mormon Church more than a century ago, has between 10,000 and 15,000 members. It believes in "plural marriage," that a man must have at least three wives to reach the highest levels of heaven. The Mormon Church forbids polygamy and excommunicates those who practice it." ... ""There is a virtual Taliban down there. You tell people this stuff happens and they don't believe it," said Dan Fischer, a former FLDS member and dentist living outside Salt Lake City who helps educate and house the exiled teens. The exodus "has been far more dramatic in the last year."" ... "Gideon was staying with friends in St. George when the Glausers heard of his plight from a woman sympathetic to the Lost Boys. "When Gideon came, he didn't know how to act around people," Stacha Glauser said. "This was like a foreign country for him." Like many kids from his hometown, Gideon's poor education left his vocabulary wanting. When he was hungry, for instance, he asked Glauser to "build" him something to eat. "I met his mother once; she was just a baby when she had him," Glauser said. "I told her she had a really wonderful son. She said she did the best she could, and that was it."" ... "The spiritual heart of the church lies in Hildale and Colorado City, communities a mile apart with a combined population of about 10,000. The towns sit at the foot of the remote and majestic Vermillion Cliffs, a place of red rock isolation. Women walk the streets in bonnets and trousers under long dresses. Their hair is pinned high on their heads, often with a braided ponytail hanging in back. Many of the boys said children didn't attend school past the eighth grade and that they were taught that blacks were inferior — the offspring of Cain and doomed to slavery. Such views have earned the FLDS a hate-group designation by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The children are told that dinosaurs came from another planet, and man never walked on the moon. More important, they learn the outside world is wicked and salvation comes through obedience to the prophet, who channels God's will." -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ If you listen to a UNIX shell, can you hear the C? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Writing software
I'm sure this has come up before, but what software is there out there that can help you manage versions. As I get further into my English program, I find that I'm having a hard time keeping track of what's what and when I wrote what when? Low- and no-cost preferred but I am interested in all. Thanks, George A ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Gulags
On 11 Jun 2005, at 11:04 pm, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: While the redneck side of me may agree (and in fact suggests that the "chemical" method ought to involve something like pouring a liter or so of concentrated H2SO4 in their lap), my real opinion as to what should be done is to get the correction officers back in control of the prisons (and not in an abusive or sadistic way, either). If what it takes is keeping the inmates locked in their cells so they can't get to each other to rape each other or kill each other, so be it. If it involves a return to the practice of "making little ones our of big ones" so that when they return to the cell block they are too exhausted to commit mischief, so be it. Perhaps someone else has a better idea of how to fix the problems in the regular prisons . . . ? Instead of the present incredibly wasteful and expensive prison system just transport all serious criminals to a tropical resort island and give them free booze, drugs and hookers for life. This would be far cheaper than the present prison system, more humane, and have a 0% recidivism rate since transportees don't get to return. Less serious criminals can do tagged house arrest and community service. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ "The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a 'mouse.' There is no evidence that people want to use these things." -John C. Dvorak, SF Examiner, Feb. 1984. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
