Re: Re: Re: The sin of NDAA
Hi Russell Standish and Bruno, Nobody else gets Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/13/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Russell Standish Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-12, 19:37:37 Subject: Re: Re: The sin of NDAA He means copies. I get two copies from you too. On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 08:48:27AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal mail exemplars ? what are they ? Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/12/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-12, 06:37:18 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 12 Sep 2012, at 12:16, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Amen. What do you mean? If you can reassure me on Obama, or have some link to that purpose, I would be delighted, but as Russell suggests, it might be out-of-topic on this list, and there are already many posts. BTW I get most of your posts in two exemplars. Am I the only one? You might need to relaunch your mail application, perhaps. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/12/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-11, 12:58:10 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 11 Sep 2012, at 13:20, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal It is ironic that Obama followed Bush policy economically (more spending) and also much like Bush in warfare, although a bit more timidly. Timidly? I read that Obama used more drones than anyone before, and, well I am not sure, I think he beats Bush in all directions. I have been very much disappointed by him. By signing the NDAA bill, vetoing all suggested precautions of language, counter-signing it by a promise of never using it (sic), (and btw violating his promise to never countersign such bill), violatig his promise on health politics, ... he gives me the chill. The human rights, by definition, applies to *all* humans. You cannot create a fuzzy class (suspect of threat) and decide that they have no human rights. Only dictatorships do that. It is a bit of a mystery. In one night, Obama has put on the war on terror a look very similar to the war on drugs. I knew the war on drugs is only fear selling business since long, but I was still naive on the war on terror. I can't help myself to doubt about the 9/11 now. Obama try do legalize at home indefinitely what we could still hope to be war-exceptional under Bush. In Europa the media makes the headline with the monstrosity of Bush, and the same media remains mute on the fact that Obama attempted to implement legally (!) those monstrosity at home (the 31 december 2011). The supreme court has judged the note anti-constitutional, so some hope remains, but for how long? Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/11/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-10, 10:55:34 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 09 Sep 2012, at 13:08, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal My feeling at the moment is to compare the sin of NDAA with that of collateral damage, and war itself, and fall back on the doctrine of just warfare. I would have still be open to that idea one year ago. But Obama did not kept his promise to decriminalize pot, to not let the feds interfere with the state on this, to at least try to refrain the war on drug, and to finish the war on terror. Not only Obama did not do that, but he has tried, through the NDAA, to make into an indefinite law what Bush succeeds to justify as warfare. I could have thought it was just a typo mistake, but Obama's administration has refuse any change to the language in the NDAA(*). So, it looks to me more as the events leading to the third reich in Germany, where the worst get power through democracy. Obama has convinced me in one night that the war on terror is as fake as the war on drugs. Now I think it is just the usual fear selling business, and they are planning the catastrophes selling. Although I have mocked the idea that 9/11 is an inside job, despite building seven, I dod not expect Obama signing a text which contains the usual dictator trick, which consists in abandoning the human right for a fuzzy category of the population, and allowing the military to overturn the laws and the constitution, and this after the war. That is not the sin of collateral
Re: Re: The sin of NDAA
Hi Bruno Marchal Amen. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/12/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-11, 12:58:10 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 11 Sep 2012, at 13:20, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal It is ironic that Obama followed Bush policy economically (more spending) and also much like Bush in warfare, although a bit more timidly. Timidly? I read that Obama used more drones than anyone before, and, well I am not sure, I think he beats Bush in all directions. I have been very much disappointed by him. By signing the NDAA bill, vetoing all suggested precautions of language, counter-signing it by a promise of never using it (sic), (and btw violating his promise to never countersign such bill), violatig his promise on health politics, ... he gives me the chill. The human rights, by definition, applies to *all* humans. You cannot create a fuzzy class (suspect of threat) and decide that they have no human rights. Only dictatorships do that. It is a bit of a mystery. In one night, Obama has put on the war on terror a look very similar to the war on drugs. I knew the war on drugs is only fear selling business since long, but I was still naive on the war on terror. I can't help myself to doubt about the 9/11 now. Obama try do legalize at home indefinitely what we could still hope to be war-exceptional under Bush. In Europa the media makes the headline with the monstrosity of Bush, and the same media remains mute on the fact that Obama attempted to implement legally (!) those monstrosity at home (the 31 december 2011). The supreme court has judged the note anti-constitutional, so some hope remains, but for how long? Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/11/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-10, 10:55:34 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 09 Sep 2012, at 13:08, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal My feeling at the moment is to compare the sin of NDAA with that of collateral damage, and war itself, and fall back on the doctrine of just warfare. I would have still be open to that idea one year ago. But Obama did not kept his promise to decriminalize pot, to not let the feds interfere with the state on this, to at least try to refrain the war on drug, and to finish the war on terror. Not only Obama did not do that, but he has tried, through the NDAA, to make into an indefinite law what Bush succeeds to justify as warfare. I could have thought it was just a typo mistake, but Obama's administration has refuse any change to the language in the NDAA(*). So, it looks to me more as the events leading to the third reich in Germany, where the worst get power through democracy. Obama has convinced me in one night that the war on terror is as fake as the war on drugs. Now I think it is just the usual fear selling business, and they are planning the catastrophes selling. Although I have mocked the idea that 9/11 is an inside job, despite building seven, I dod not expect Obama signing a text which contains the usual dictator trick, which consists in abandoning the human right for a fuzzy category of the population, and allowing the military to overturn the laws and the constitution, and this after the war. That is not the sin of collateral damage, that is the sin of terrorism, simply. Obama could have said more simply that the terrorist have won. Al Qaeda looks more and more like a CIA construct, as frightening that might seem. The human right have to be applied to every one, or they are no more human rights. If suspects of whatever have no more rights, you are no more living in a democracy but in a tyranny. If the media were able to do their job, Obama would already be detained in a jail for attempt of coup d'etat. I have supported him, but I do think now that both the republicans and democrats have just zero power, and are the puppets of international mafia. 5 years of alcohol prohibition has given Al Capone, and I'm afraid we are seeing the result of 75 years of prohibition of cannabis. It was a Trojan Horse for the international criminality and terrorism. I am less terrorized by bombs than by laws allowing detention without trial for people being only suspected. If you abandon an atom of liberty for an atom of security, you lose both. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/9/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 14:16:31 Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? On 08 Sep 2012
Re: Re: The sin of NDAA
He means copies. I get two copies from you too. On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 08:48:27AM -0400, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal mail exemplars ? what are they ? Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/12/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-12, 06:37:18 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 12 Sep 2012, at 12:16, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Amen. What do you mean? If you can reassure me on Obama, or have some link to that purpose, I would be delighted, but as Russell suggests, it might be out-of-topic on this list, and there are already many posts. BTW I get most of your posts in two exemplars. Am I the only one? You might need to relaunch your mail application, perhaps. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/12/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-11, 12:58:10 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 11 Sep 2012, at 13:20, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal It is ironic that Obama followed Bush policy economically (more spending) and also much like Bush in warfare, although a bit more timidly. Timidly? I read that Obama used more drones than anyone before, and, well I am not sure, I think he beats Bush in all directions. I have been very much disappointed by him. By signing the NDAA bill, vetoing all suggested precautions of language, counter-signing it by a promise of never using it (sic), (and btw violating his promise to never countersign such bill), violatig his promise on health politics, ... he gives me the chill. The human rights, by definition, applies to *all* humans. You cannot create a fuzzy class (suspect of threat) and decide that they have no human rights. Only dictatorships do that. It is a bit of a mystery. In one night, Obama has put on the war on terror a look very similar to the war on drugs. I knew the war on drugs is only fear selling business since long, but I was still naive on the war on terror. I can't help myself to doubt about the 9/11 now. Obama try do legalize at home indefinitely what we could still hope to be war-exceptional under Bush. In Europa the media makes the headline with the monstrosity of Bush, and the same media remains mute on the fact that Obama attempted to implement legally (!) those monstrosity at home (the 31 december 2011). The supreme court has judged the note anti-constitutional, so some hope remains, but for how long? Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/11/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-10, 10:55:34 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 09 Sep 2012, at 13:08, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal My feeling at the moment is to compare the sin of NDAA with that of collateral damage, and war itself, and fall back on the doctrine of just warfare. I would have still be open to that idea one year ago. But Obama did not kept his promise to decriminalize pot, to not let the feds interfere with the state on this, to at least try to refrain the war on drug, and to finish the war on terror. Not only Obama did not do that, but he has tried, through the NDAA, to make into an indefinite law what Bush succeeds to justify as warfare. I could have thought it was just a typo mistake, but Obama's administration has refuse any change to the language in the NDAA(*). So, it looks to me more as the events leading to the third reich in Germany, where the worst get power through democracy. Obama has convinced me in one night that the war on terror is as fake as the war on drugs. Now I think it is just the usual fear selling business, and they are planning the catastrophes selling. Although I have mocked the idea that 9/11 is an inside job, despite building seven, I dod not expect Obama signing a text which contains the usual dictator trick, which consists in abandoning the human right for a fuzzy category of the population, and allowing the military to overturn the laws and the constitution, and this after the war. That is not the sin of collateral damage, that is the sin of terrorism, simply. Obama could have said more simply that the terrorist have won. Al Qaeda looks more and more like a CIA construct, as frightening that might seem. The human right have to be applied to every one, or they are no more human rights. If suspects of whatever have no more rights, you are no more
Re: Re: The sin of NDAA
Hi Bruno Marchal It is ironic that Obama followed Bush policy economically (more spending) and also much like Bush in warfare, although a bit more timidly. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/11/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-10, 10:55:34 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 09 Sep 2012, at 13:08, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal My feeling at the moment is to compare the sin of NDAA with that of collateral damage, and war itself, and fall back on the doctrine of just warfare. I would have still be open to that idea one year ago. But Obama did not kept his promise to decriminalize pot, to not let the feds interfere with the state on this, to at least try to refrain the war on drug, and to finish the war on terror. Not only Obama did not do that, but he has tried, through the NDAA, to make into an indefinite law what Bush succeeds to justify as warfare. I could have thought it was just a typo mistake, but Obama's administration has refuse any change to the language in the NDAA(*). So, it looks to me more as the events leading to the third reich in Germany, where the worst get power through democracy. Obama has convinced me in one night that the war on terror is as fake as the war on drugs. Now I think it is just the usual fear selling business, and they are planning the catastrophes selling. Although I have mocked the idea that 9/11 is an inside job, despite building seven, I dod not expect Obama signing a text which contains the usual dictator trick, which consists in abandoning the human right for a fuzzy category of the population, and allowing the military to overturn the laws and the constitution, and this after the war. That is not the sin of collateral damage, that is the sin of terrorism, simply. Obama could have said more simply that the terrorist have won. Al Qaeda looks more and more like a CIA construct, as frightening that might seem. The human right have to be applied to every one, or they are no more human rights. If suspects of whatever have no more rights, you are no more living in a democracy but in a tyranny. If the media were able to do their job, Obama would already be detained in a jail for attempt of coup d'etat. I have supported him, but I do think now that both the republicans and democrats have just zero power, and are the puppets of international mafia. 5 years of alcohol prohibition has given Al Capone, and I'm afraid we are seeing the result of 75 years of prohibition of cannabis. It was a Trojan Horse for the international criminality and terrorism. I am less terrorized by bombs than by laws allowing detention without trial for people being only suspected. If you abandon an atom of liberty for an atom of security, you lose both. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/9/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 14:16:31 Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? On 08 Sep 2012, at 15:33, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal OK, I see, you think I judge the abilities of people by the color of their skin. So you call me a racist. I was thinking only you might judge someone by the constitution of its body. You don't answer the question: can your daughter marry a man which body is 100% machine? You might be a liberal, because ironically and paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought the subject up. I don't mean to offend you with this talk of politics. Conservatives are not perfect either. Sure. I tend to be rather conservative, in principle. I think that today the liberal/conservative division makes no sense. The division is more bastards/ victim of bastards, like Romney and Obama against Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or Norman Solomon, or those who understand that the human rights apply to everybody and those who does not, or between the fear sellers and the constitutionalists. The republicans betrayed themselves by not attacking Obama on the NDAA notes. Thanks to the existence of a many years long drug and food prohibition I am hardly astonished. As long as prohibition continue, there are no politics, only well- disguised form of mafias, which are succeeding to get the whole financial system into hostage. The individual human is in danger. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/8/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 04:46:38 Subject: Re: Racism
Re: The sin of NDAA
On 11 Sep 2012, at 13:20, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal It is ironic that Obama followed Bush policy economically (more spending) and also much like Bush in warfare, although a bit more timidly. Timidly? I read that Obama used more drones than anyone before, and, well I am not sure, I think he beats Bush in all directions. I have been very much disappointed by him. By signing the NDAA bill, vetoing all suggested precautions of language, counter-signing it by a promise of never using it (sic), (and btw violating his promise to never countersign such bill), violatig his promise on health politics, ... he gives me the chill. The human rights, by definition, applies to *all* humans. You cannot create a fuzzy class (suspect of threat) and decide that they have no human rights. Only dictatorships do that. It is a bit of a mystery. In one night, Obama has put on the war on terror a look very similar to the war on drugs. I knew the war on drugs is only fear selling business since long, but I was still naive on the war on terror. I can't help myself to doubt about the 9/11 now. Obama try do legalize at home indefinitely what we could still hope to be war-exceptional under Bush. In Europa the media makes the headline with the monstrosity of Bush, and the same media remains mute on the fact that Obama attempted to implement legally (!) those monstrosity at home (the 31 december 2011). The supreme court has judged the note anti-constitutional, so some hope remains, but for how long? Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/11/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-10, 10:55:34 Subject: Re: The sin of NDAA On 09 Sep 2012, at 13:08, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal My feeling at the moment is to compare the sin of NDAA with that of collateral damage, and war itself, and fall back on the doctrine of just warfare. I would have still be open to that idea one year ago. But Obama did not kept his promise to decriminalize pot, to not let the feds interfere with the state on this, to at least try to refrain the war on drug, and to finish the war on terror. Not only Obama did not do that, but he has tried, through the NDAA, to make into an indefinite law what Bush succeeds to justify as warfare. I could have thought it was just a typo mistake, but Obama's administration has refuse any change to the language in the NDAA(*). So, it looks to me more as the events leading to the third reich in Germany, where the worst get power through democracy. Obama has convinced me in one night that the war on terror is as fake as the war on drugs. Now I think it is just the usual fear selling business, and they are planning the catastrophes selling. Although I have mocked the idea that 9/11 is an inside job, despite building seven, I dod not expect Obama signing a text which contains the usual dictator trick, which consists in abandoning the human right for a fuzzy category of the population, and allowing the military to overturn the laws and the constitution, and this after the war. That is not the sin of collateral damage, that is the sin of terrorism, simply. Obama could have said more simply that the terrorist have won. Al Qaeda looks more and more like a CIA construct, as frightening that might seem. The human right have to be applied to every one, or they are no more human rights. If suspects of whatever have no more rights, you are no more living in a democracy but in a tyranny. If the media were able to do their job, Obama would already be detained in a jail for attempt of coup d'etat. I have supported him, but I do think now that both the republicans and democrats have just zero power, and are the puppets of international mafia. 5 years of alcohol prohibition has given Al Capone, and I'm afraid we are seeing the result of 75 years of prohibition of cannabis. It was a Trojan Horse for the international criminality and terrorism. I am less terrorized by bombs than by laws allowing detention without trial for people being only suspected. If you abandon an atom of liberty for an atom of security, you lose both. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/9/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 14:16:31 Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? On 08 Sep 2012, at 15:33, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal OK, I see, you think I judge the abilities of people by the color of their skin. So you call me a racist. I was thinking only you might judge someone by the constitution of its body. You don't answer the question: can your daughter marry
Re: The sin of NDAA
On 09 Sep 2012, at 13:08, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal My feeling at the moment is to compare the sin of NDAA with that of collateral damage, and war itself, and fall back on the doctrine of just warfare. I would have still be open to that idea one year ago. But Obama did not kept his promise to decriminalize pot, to not let the feds interfere with the state on this, to at least try to refrain the war on drug, and to finish the war on terror. Not only Obama did not do that, but he has tried, through the NDAA, to make into an indefinite law what Bush succeeds to justify as warfare. I could have thought it was just a typo mistake, but Obama's administration has refuse any change to the language in the NDAA(*). So, it looks to me more as the events leading to the third reich in Germany, where the worst get power through democracy. Obama has convinced me in one night that the war on terror is as fake as the war on drugs. Now I think it is just the usual fear selling business, and they are planning the catastrophes selling. Although I have mocked the idea that 9/11 is an inside job, despite building seven, I dod not expect Obama signing a text which contains the usual dictator trick, which consists in abandoning the human right for a fuzzy category of the population, and allowing the military to overturn the laws and the constitution, and this after the war. That is not the sin of collateral damage, that is the sin of terrorism, simply. Obama could have said more simply that the terrorist have won. Al Qaeda looks more and more like a CIA construct, as frightening that might seem. The human right have to be applied to every one, or they are no more human rights. If suspects of whatever have no more rights, you are no more living in a democracy but in a tyranny. If the media were able to do their job, Obama would already be detained in a jail for attempt of coup d'etat. I have supported him, but I do think now that both the republicans and democrats have just zero power, and are the puppets of international mafia. 5 years of alcohol prohibition has given Al Capone, and I'm afraid we are seeing the result of 75 years of prohibition of cannabis. It was a Trojan Horse for the international criminality and terrorism. I am less terrorized by bombs than by laws allowing detention without trial for people being only suspected. If you abandon an atom of liberty for an atom of security, you lose both. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/9/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 14:16:31 Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? On 08 Sep 2012, at 15:33, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal OK, I see, you think I judge the abilities of people by the color of their skin. So you call me a racist. I was thinking only you might judge someone by the constitution of its body. You don't answer the question: can your daughter marry a man which body is 100% machine? You might be a liberal, because ironically and paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought the subject up. I don't mean to offend you with this talk of politics. Conservatives are not perfect either. Sure. I tend to be rather conservative, in principle. I think that today the liberal/conservative division makes no sense. The division is more bastards/ victim of bastards, like Romney and Obama against Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or Norman Solomon, or those who understand that the human rights apply to everybody and those who does not, or between the fear sellers and the constitutionalists. The republicans betrayed themselves by not attacking Obama on the NDAA notes. Thanks to the existence of a many years long drug and food prohibition I am hardly astonished. As long as prohibition continue, there are no politics, only well- disguised form of mafias, which are succeeding to get the whole financial system into hostage. The individual human is in danger. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/8/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 04:46:38 Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? On 07 Sep 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Racism ? How's that implied ? Do you accept that your daughter marry a man who has undergone an artificial brain transplant? But I do agree that perception and Cs are not understandable with materialistic concepts at least as they are commonly used. Instead they are what the mind can sense, OK. as a sixth sense. Hmm
The sin of NDAA
Hi Bruno Marchal My feeling at the moment is to compare the sin of NDAA with that of collateral damage, and war itself, and fall back on the doctrine of just warfare. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/9/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 14:16:31 Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? On 08 Sep 2012, at 15:33, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal OK, I see, you think I judge the abilities of people by the color of their skin. So you call me a racist. I was thinking only you might judge someone by the constitution of its body. You don't answer the question: can your daughter marry a man which body is 100% machine? You might be a liberal, because ironically and paradoxically they see the world in terms of race. Conservatives attempt to live by facts. I never saw racism in what what I wrote until you brought the subject up. I don't mean to offend you with this talk of politics. Conservatives are not perfect either. Sure. I tend to be rather conservative, in principle. I think that today the liberal/conservative division makes no sense. The division is more bastards/ victim of bastards, like Romney and Obama against Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or Norman Solomon, or those who understand that the human rights apply to everybody and those who does not, or between the fear sellers and the constitutionalists. The republicans betrayed themselves by not attacking Obama on the NDAA notes. Thanks to the existence of a many years long drug and food prohibition I am hardly astonished. As long as prohibition continue, there are no politics, only well- disguised form of mafias, which are succeeding to get the whole financial system into hostage. The individual human is in danger. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/8/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-08, 04:46:38 Subject: Re: Racism ? How's that implied ? On 07 Sep 2012, at 15:00, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal Racism ? How's that implied ? Do you accept that your daughter marry a man who has undergone an artificial brain transplant? But I do agree that perception and Cs are not understandable with materialistic concepts at least as they are commonly used. Instead they are what the mind can sense, OK. as a sixth sense. Hmm... The mind is similar to driving a car through Platoville and watching the static events in passing. OK. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/7/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-06, 14:12:37 Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One On 05 Sep 2012, at 18:12, Roger Clough wrote: I don't think that life or mind or intelligence can be teleported. Especially since nobody knows what they are. I also don't believe that you can download the contents of somebody's brain. This is just restating that you don't believe in comp. OK, develop your theory, and predict something testable, and we will better understand what you mean. If not it looks just like a form of racism based on magic. Bruno Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/5/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-05, 11:04:53 Subject: Re: Sane2004 Step One On 05 Sep 2012, at 06:14, meekerdb wrote: On 9/4/2012 7:19 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 06:48:58PM -0700, Craig Weinberg wrote: I have problems with all three of the comp assumptions: *yes, doctor*: This is really the sleight of hand that props up the entire thought experiment. If you agree that you are nothing but your brain function and that your brain function can be replaced by the functioning of non-brain devices, then you have already agreed that human individuality is a universal commodity. Calling it a sleight of hand is a bit rough. It is the meat of the comp assumption, and spelling it out this way makes it very explicit. Either you agree you can be copied (without feeling a thing), or you don't. If you do, you must face up to the consequences of the argument, if you don't, then you do not accept computationalism, and the consequences of the UDA do not apply to your worldview. I suppose I can be copied. But does it follow that I am just the computations in my brain. It seems likely that I also require an outside environment/world with which I
Re: The sin of NDAA
On 9/9/2012 7:08 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Bruno Marchal My feeling at the moment is to compare the sin of NDAA with that of collateral damage, and war itself, and fall back on the doctrine of just warfare. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net mailto:rclo...@verizon.net 9/9/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function. Hi Roger, Are you referring to the section within the NDAA that refers to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012#Indefinite_detention_without_trial:_Section_1021 It is ironic that many of the same people that are clamoring for Government to take care of them are complaining about the powers that the government needs to do exactly that. How about people just mind their own business and take care of themselves? -- Onward! Stephen http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
