Darren Hayes wrote:
I'm all for free speech but could this thread please be moved to another
forum immediately. List Manager, are you there?
Darren
I am anti-censorship, especially on political discussion. The list is
censored only in that (with exceptions) only subscribers may post,
because we'
Keelan Kindt wrote:
Yes, please.
This is exactly the type of thing I thought could be avoided on a LINUX
USERS GROUP mailing list.
I don't think it can be avoided anywhere, though this list isn't as bad
as some I'm on.
November can't come soon enough.
-ajb
> I'm all for free speech but could this thread please be moved to another
> forum immediately. List Manager, are you there?
>
Yes, please.
This is exactly the type of thing I thought could be avoided on a LINUX
USERS GROUP mailing list.
___
EUGLUG mai
I think this is one of those discussions that had to happen.
you don't have to read every message that comes through.
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 13:58:55 -0700, Darren Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm all for free speech but could this thread please be moved to another
> forum immediately. List Ma
On Wednesday 20 October 2004 2:16 pm, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> no. I'm trying to show Ken that he cannot make political statements
> here without getting flak.
I was not aware that complaining about someone making political statements on
this forum is, in and of itself, a political statement.
Now
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 01:56:38PM +, Jeff Newton wrote:
> Well Gentleman, this thread and topic is getting a little OFF TOPIC here
> and the list is starting in my view becoming a campaign of political
> statements.
no. I'm trying to show Ken that he cannot make political statements
here wi
On Wednesday 20 October 2004 6:56 am, Jeff Newton wrote:
> This below is TOTALLY uncalled for
It's a .sig -- picked from a file of quotes at random (Kmail allows a program
to be used for a .sig). If you want a copy of the shell script that I use,
i'll be happy to post it on my Web site for do
On Wednesday 20 October 2004 1:40 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> There's plenty of things to dislike Bush for: trouncing on our
> constitutional rights, for one (Patriot Act, unlawful holding, etc),
Amen. And all of that can be done without engaging in ad-hominem attacks and
hate speech. Inde
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 01:40:15PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Nearly any criticism can be considered "hate speech", it's a useless word
> tossed around by unconstructive people who can't intelligently comprehend
> the other side's point of view. It's a cop-out.
thank you.
to other on the
Well Gentleman, this thread and topic is getting a little OFF TOPIC here
and the list is starting in my view becoming a campaign of political
statements. I THOUGHT this was a list for Linux, not political rallies
and the sorts.
I have to agree with KEN on this - TAKE IT OFF LIST, Boys!
And for
I'm all for free speech but could this thread please be moved to another
forum immediately. List Manager, are you there?
Darren
___
EUGLUG mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 01:05:16PM -0700, Ken Barber wrote:
> I'm sorry, but the blind-rage jihad against the President that has been so
> popular in this town for the last 3.5 years is nothing less than hate speech.
I'm sorry, but the blind-rage jihad against EF! that has been so
popular in
>> yes, saying EF!
>> is criminal and terrorist is a political statement.
>
> Nonsense.
>
> You had better go back and re-read the thread. In the beginning, I only
> said
> they were criminal, which is a fact that is universally accepted among
> reasonable people.
I guess I can ascertain that yo
Except for your sig...
> And for the record, Larry Price and I did take the discussion off-list.
>
> Ken
> --
> " A 12 gauge shotgun shell makes a handy little device by which to blow a
> large hole in an enemy Soldiers front tire. Combined with a couple of
> pieces
> of ordinary water pipe, wrap
On Wednesday 20 October 2004 12:42 pm, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 11:37:38AM -0700, Ken Barber wrote:
> > I would REALLY like it if we wouldn't discuss politics here.
>
> so then don't post anything related to politics.
Please show me when I have EVER started a political thread
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 11:37:38AM -0700, Ken Barber wrote:
> I would REALLY like it if we wouldn't discuss politics here.
so then don't post anything related to politics. yes, saying EF!
is criminal and terrorist is a political statement.
and don't ever accuse me of hatred when I'm simply stat
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 07:52:12AM -0700, Russ Johnson wrote:
> Jacob Meuser wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 04:21:03PM -0700, Russ Johnson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>In another useful attempt to produce a definition, Paul Pillar, a former
> >>deputy chief of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center, a
On Wednesday 20 October 2004 9:32 am, Jason Van Cleve wrote:
> Quoth Ken Barber, on Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:29:45 -0700:
> > The proper place to deal with it is in the conversation where it takes
> > place, not another conversation in another room.
>
> Wrong! Please take this off list.
Excuse me, Jas
Quoth Ken Barber, on Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:29:45 -0700:
> The proper place to deal with it is in the conversation where it takes
> place, not another conversation in another room.
Wrong! Please take this off list.
--Jason Van Cleve
--
I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous!
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Voting would not be considered terrorism.
Violence is the key here.
But what you have to understand here is what the government considers
"violence". They stretch the term quite a bit, including acts of vandalism
under its unbrella.
Some of the counseling I've been
> Voting would not be considered terrorism.
>
> Violence is the key here.
But what you have to understand here is what the government considers
"violence". They stretch the term quite a bit, including acts of vandalism
under its unbrella.
According to the government, organizations such as the EL
Jacob Meuser wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 04:21:03PM -0700, Russ Johnson wrote:
In another useful attempt to produce a definition, Paul Pillar, a former
deputy chief of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center, argues that there are
four key elements of terrorism:
1. It is premeditated?planned in
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 04:21:03PM -0700, Russ Johnson wrote:
> The State Department defines terrorism as "premeditated, politically
> motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by
> subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence
> an audience."
>
> In
On 20041019.1721, Jacob Meuser said ...
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 04:21:03PM -0700, Russ Johnson wrote:
>
> > In another useful attempt to produce a definition, Paul Pillar, a former
> > deputy chief of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center, argues that there are
> > four key elements of terrorism:
One entry found for terrorism.
Main Entry: ter·ror·ism
Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m
Function: noun
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
- ter·ror·ist /-&r-ist/ adjective or noun
- ter·ror·is·tic /"ter-&r-'is-tik/ adjective
Jacob Meuser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> On
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 04:21:03PM -0700, Russ Johnson wrote:
> In another useful attempt to produce a definition, Paul Pillar, a former
> deputy chief of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center, argues that there are
> four key elements of terrorism:
>
> 1. It is premeditated?planned in advance, r
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Firstly, I should clarify that the US government defines terrorism as
those who kill OR disrupt society OR strike fear in large groups of
people. You don't actually have to commit violent acts to be officially
labeled as a terrorist.
Actually, to quote from the Council O
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 04:09:48PM -0700, Jim K wrote:
> To those who like the direction this country is heading(war, etc. ).
> VOTE!!!
> To those who don't like the direction this country is heading(war,
> etc. ). VOTE!!!
> If you don't vote and can legally vote, then why gripe? You are
>
To those who like the direction this country is heading(war, etc. ).
VOTE!!!
To those who don't like the direction this country is heading(war,
etc. ). VOTE!!!
If you don't vote and can legally vote, then why gripe? You are
making a choice like it or not.
Jim K
PS Study the issues before y
> as much as I'm amused by this, I only have a couple last questions ...
>
> if terrorists are defined as those who kill and disrupt society
> (cause job loss, disrupting governments, etc), then what do the
> numbers say about this?
Firstly, I should clarify that the US government defines terrori
pot <--> kettle <--> black
Firstly, I do not support nor particularly care for EF!, I merely believe
in that Constitution thingy. I would apply the same to any group which
acts under a lawful umbrella, which EF! obviously does, as it's not
designated as a "terrorist organization" by the government
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 2:03 pm, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> if terrorists are defined as those who kill and disrupt society
> (cause job loss, disrupting governments, etc), then what do the
> numbers say about this?
>
> how many lives (and jobs, even) have EF! taken, as opposed to
> the Bush adminis
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 12:29:45PM -0700, Ken Barber wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 October 2004 12:13 pm, larry price wrote:
>
> > Ken, you brought up EF!, it's rather disingenious to get worked up
> > about someone goring your favorite oxen when you've gored theirs
> > first.
>
> There's nothing dising
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 12:13 pm, larry price wrote:
> Ken, you brought up EF!, it's rather disingenious to get worked up
> about someone goring your favorite oxen when you've gored theirs
> first.
There's nothing disingenious about getting worked up over lies and hatred.
It offends me, it ha
The activism list is still up, and still the place for these kinds of
discussions.
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:03:25 -0700, Ken Barber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 October 2004 10:54 am, Jacob Meuser wrote:
>
> > The fact that the Bush administration is both criminal and terrorist is
>
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 10:54 am, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> The fact that the Bush administration is both criminal and terrorist is
> pretty well established. But since this is off-topic for this forum, I
> won't pursue this thread any further.
Yes, VERY off-topic and totally uncalled for. Hatre
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:54:10 -0700, Jacob Meuser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 10:43:09AM -0700, Ken Barber wrote:
> > On Tuesday 19 October 2004 10:36 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Earth First! is not a criminal/terrorist organization.
> >
> > The fact that Earth First!
On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 10:43:09AM -0700, Ken Barber wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 October 2004 10:36 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Earth First! is not a criminal/terrorist organization.
>
> The fact that Earth First! is both criminal and terrorist is pretty well
> established. But since this is of
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 10:36 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Earth First! is not a criminal/terrorist organization.
The fact that Earth First! is both criminal and terrorist is pretty well
established. But since this is off-topic for this forum, I won't pursue this
thread any further.
Ken
Earth First! is not a criminal/terrorist organization. However, that's not
to say that a lot of EF! members aren't also ELF (Earth Liberation Front)
members. Hell, there's probably some Sierra Club members who are also ELF
members.
Aside from that issue, the University of Oregon is public property
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 5:39 am, T. Joseph CARTER wrote:
> The library is subsidized. Wireless access isn't. Besides, last I heard,
> you couldn't commit credit card fraud by reading a library book (unless
> the library has started to carry books far more controversial than I'd
> ever imagine
41 matches
Mail list logo
