EASY MONEY ON THE NET^*APOLOGY
Emma
I have made a terrible mistake by posting the chain letter into this
group.
I didn't know it was illegal.
I hope I didn't offend anyone, it won't be happening again.
I'm sorry.
Emma
Brian Gold
You are forgiven. I was wondering where it came from
Brian
Devon Hart
> Emma wrote:
> >
> > I have made a terrible mistake by posting the chain letter into this
> > group.
> >
> > I didn't know it was illegal.
> >
> > I hope I didn't offend anyone, it won't be happening again.
> >
> > I'm sorry.
> >
> > Emma
>
apology will happen again and again, if the last couple weeks are any
indication.
Navstar
Brian Gold wrote:
>
> Emma wrote:
> >
> > I have made a terrible mistake by posting the chain letter into this
> > group.
> >
> > I didn't know it was illegal.
> >
> > I hope I didn't offend anyone, it won't be happening again.
> >
> > I'm sorry.
> >
> > Emma
>
> Brian
TO: All Users
FM: Navstar
Subj: 18 USC.......
Via: Earthlink.net
At: 1922 Hrs EST. 020197 Nav...@earthlink.net.....4th Quadrant, Beta
Section Fort Meade, MD
(At the Palace)
Navstar Writes:
The United States Secret Service and the Federal Bureau of
Investigations with a special task force comprised by the US Postal
Service and the US Department of Justice are currently monitoring all
avenues of Internet Access and User groups for violations of the USC. If
you are not sure what you are posting... i.e. chain letter or whatever,
please consult your attorney or contact the local office of the FBI, US
Secret Service, US Postmaster General or The United States Attorney's
Office. Their phone number can be found the the Blue section of your
local yellow pages.
Remember the old cliche....when in doubt....shout! The last thing you
need is a raid on your home at 3:00 AM from men in black swat suits,
hauling you, your loved ones, your computers and your dog away for
something you were not aware of doing being illegal!
Good luck and safe surfing..... remember...in the eyes of the Law,
ignorance is not an excuse in commiting a crime. Be on guard! Protect
yourself and learn the truth before you venture into cyberspace!
Wise advise from some-one who knows!
Bill
Goddamn it, I'd rather tolerate spam then give the feds a reason to
fuck with the internet....they know we don't need them....we are the
only law here, and even they are subject to us (well technically they are
us, but you know what I mean) Am I rambling? Gee, maybe I should have
inhaled.........
Daniel Serda
Navstar wrote:
> Good luck and safe surfing..... remember...in the eyes of the Law,
> ignorance is not an excuse in commiting a crime. Be on guard! Protect
> yourself and learn the truth before you venture into cyberspace!
On that note, perhaps AOL and other major ISPs should include a copy
of Cavazos and Morin's _Cyberspace and the Law_ (ISBN 0-262-53123-2)
with their free subscription diskettes.
--
SPAM DISCLAIMER: Please remove .nospam in the reply-to address above
to form an appropriate reply address.
Jay N. Turkovsky
If this means that I have to have my atty. present when I use my computer,
just to make sure I'm making proper use of my freedom of speech, the can
stick it. My computer is defended with much fire power!!!
Navstar <nav...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<32F3DF...@earthlink.net>...
> Good luck and safe surfing..... remember...in the eyes of the Law,
> ignorance is not an excuse in commiting a crime. Be on guard! Protect
> yourself and learn the truth before you venture into cyberspace!
>
>
adsc...@ix.netcom.com
>> The United States Secret Service and the Federal Bureau of
>> Investigations with a special task force comprised by the US Postal
>> Service and the US Department of Justice are currently monitoring all
>> avenues of Internet Access and User groups for violations of the USC. If
>> you are not sure what you are posting... i.e. chain letter or whatever,
>> please consult your attorney or contact the local office of the FBI, US
>> Secret Service, US Postmaster General or The United States Attorney's
>> Office. Their phone number can be found the the Blue section of your
Whats the secret services jursdiction in this?
>> local yellow pages.
>> Remember the old cliche....when in doubt....shout! The last thing you
>> need is a raid on your home at 3:00 AM from men in black swat suits,
>> hauling you, your loved ones, your computers and your dog away for
>> something you were not aware of doing being illegal!
Bwahahahahahahhahahaahahahahaaha!
I guess civil rights and the first 10 amendments of the constitution
mean nothing anymore right?
>> Wise advise from some-one who knows!
Sure about that?
Mr. church is more like someone that knows:
========================================================================
<PUBLIC><HAS REPLIES><RECEIVED>
Number : 107 of 108 Date: 01-22-92 15:03
Confer : Computer Happenings
From : Leonard Church
To : All
Subject: Bbs Freedom ][
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As someone involved in the telephone industry on the level of security
and data integrity... I would like to inform everyone that uses modems
and/or are bbs operators of some information.
The first thing that everyone that uses a modem should know is that
every time you fire up your modem your activating monitoring equipment
somewhere in the U.S. I have worked for several large telephone
networks that routinely monitor and reroute modem and fax
transmissions
through devices that allow them to view what is being transmitted and
even decodes encrypted data and fax packets used by major corporations
and governmental agencies. This is allowed under the heading of
"Maintenance Monitoring" and may be continued for up to 6 months
without
the need of any legal paperwork being generated. Under an obscure
pre-WWII ruling by the agency that is now the FCC... "No information
may
be encoded or transmitted over PUBLIC or PRIVATE forms of telephony or
radio with the exception of those agencies involved in the National
Security" a further designation goes on to say "with the exception of
the MORSE system of 'transmittal', any communication that is not
interpretable by the human ear is forbidden and unlawful." The
information gathered goes to 3 seperate database facilities...1 is
codenamed Diana and is located in Brussels, the 2nd is named Fredrick
and is located somewhere in Malaysia, the 3rd is named Elizabeth and
is
located in Boulder, Colorado. The information stored in these systems
is accessable by the US Government, Interpol, Scotland Yard and
various
other such agencies. Your credit rating is also affected by your
modem
usage... if you ever get a copy of your credit history and find a
listing that has HN06443 <--= this is a negative risk rating. or a
code
87AT4 <---= an even more negative risk rating.... these will usually
have no description on them... and if you inquire about them they will
tell you that it just comes from the system that way.
I am currently working for another major carrier as a consultant and
have been able to watch these systems operate...at one unnamed long
distance carrier here in Columbus Ohio in their NCC, Network Control
Center, you can see several rows of computer terminals which have
approximately 30 to 40 separate windows in each... these windows have
data transmissions that are being monitored... banks of 9 track tapes
are going constantly to record everything. Everyone should realize
that
even if a sysop posts a disclaimer at the beginning of his bbs about
no
access to governmental agencies or law enforcement...that it isn't
worth
the time it takes to type it in... looking forward to hearing
reactions
to this.
---
* SLMR 2.0 * * My Castle BBS 614-236-4015 10pm to 10am M-F 6pm-6pm
S-S
========================================================================
@@@@@@@@@@@ Turiyan Gold - Best of WWIV 1994 @@@@@@@@@@@
adsc...@ix.netcom.com
Make $580.00 from $99.00 legally!:
http://www2.netcom.com/~adscapes/currency.html
Opinions do not reflect those of any other employee of ADSCAPES.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Wealth may corrupt some, but absolute poverty corrupts absolutley."
--Adam Smith
|
Delos7
Jay N. Turkovsky wrote:
>
> If this means that I have to have my atty. present when I use my computer,
> just to make sure I'm making proper use of my freedom of speech, the can
> stick it. My computer is defended with much fire power!!!
>
is this all about anyway?? I'm a bit new to all this but neither am I
paranoid.
Andy Walton
In article <32F4E3...@whitehouse.gov>, Bill <pres...@whitehouse.gov>
wrote:
[govt. monitoring the Internet for fraud]
:Goddamn it, I'd rather tolerate spam then give the feds a reason to
:fuck with the internet....they know we don't need them....we are the
:only law here
Er...no.
The same laws apply to people using the Internet as they do to people using
any other medium. The international nature of the 'net raises some
problems, but Usenet posts are public, and the government can read and post
just like anyone else. They can look for evidence of fraud or other crimes
just like they can read classified ads in the local paper. That's a very
different matter from censorship and outlawing encryption.
Don't get too caught up in the cyber-anarchist hype. The Internet is a
powerul medium of communication for the lucky few with access to it, but it
doesn't magically remove you from the real world as we know it. The laws of
the land, the law of averages, Murphy's Law, and the laws of physics all
still apply, whether you're sitting behind a newspaper or behind a
computer.
Newsgroups.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We were once so close to heaven, Peter came out and gave us medals
declaring us the nicest of the damned." --They Might Be Giants
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Walton * att...@mindspring.com * http://www.mindspring.com/~atticus
Navstar
Bill wrote:
>
> Navstar wrote:
> >
> > Brian Gold wrote:
> > >
> > > Emma wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I have made a terrible mistake by posting the chain letter into this
> > > > group.
> > > >
> > > > I didn't know it was illegal.
> > > >
> > > > I hope I didn't offend anyone, it won't be happening again.
> > > >
> > > > I'm sorry.
> > > >
> > > > Emma
> > >
> > > You are forgiven. I was wondering where it came from
> > > Brian
> >
> > TO: All Users
> > FM: Navstar
> > Subj: 18 USC.......
> > Via: Earthlink.net
> >
> > At: 1922 Hrs EST. 020197 Nav...@earthlink.net.....4th Quadrant, Beta
> > Section Fort Meade, MD
> > (At the Palace)
> >
> > Navstar Writes:
> >
> > Investigations with a special task force comprised by the US Postal
> > Service and the US Department of Justice are currently monitoring all
> > avenues of Internet Access and User groups for violations of the USC. If
> > you are not sure what you are posting... i.e. chain letter or whatever,
> > please consult your attorney or contact the local office of the FBI, US
> > Secret Service, US Postmaster General or The United States Attorney's
> > Office. Their phone number can be found the the Blue section of your
> > Remember the old cliche....when in doubt....shout! The last thing you
> > need is a raid on your home at 3:00 AM from men in black swat suits,
> > hauling you, your loved ones, your computers and your dog away for
> > something you were not aware of doing being illegal!
> >
> > ignorance is not an excuse in commiting a crime. Be on guard! Protect
> > yourself and learn the truth before you venture into cyberspace!
> >
>
> fuck with the internet....they know we don't need them....we are the
> us, but you know what I mean) Am I rambling? Gee, maybe I should have
> inhaled.........
ATTENTION...................TO ALL USERS OF THE INTERNET..........
The internet as we know it today will soon be forgotten. It is important
that we maintain law and order to have peace in our society. It is
important that we not abuse the technology...for it has been good to us.
Please disregard those out there that cannot understand the importance
as to why there aare laws to protect the innocent and the good.
I am sure this last posting did not come from President
Clinton....beware.. your email and postings are tracible.....
Just do things right and all will be find.
navstar over and out!
Navstar
Daniel Serda wrote:
>
> Navstar wrote:
>
> > Good luck and safe surfing..... remember...in the eyes of the Law,
> > ignorance is not an excuse in commiting a crime. Be on guard! Protect
> > yourself and learn the truth before you venture into cyberspace!
>
> of Cavazos and Morin's _Cyberspace and the Law_ (ISBN 0-262-53123-2)
> with their free subscription diskettes.
>
> --
> SPAM DISCLAIMER: Please remove .nospam in the reply-to address above
> to form an appropriate reply address.
You are absolutely correct sir!
Navstar
adsc...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> >> The United States Secret Service and the Federal Bureau of
> >> Investigations with a special task force comprised by the US Postal
> >> Service and the US Department of Justice are currently monitoring all
> >> avenues of Internet Access and User groups for violations of the USC. If
> >> you are not sure what you are posting... i.e. chain letter or whatever,
> >> please consult your attorney or contact the local office of the FBI, US
> >> Secret Service, US Postmaster General or The United States Attorney's
> >> Office. Their phone number can be found the the Blue section of your
>
>
> >> Remember the old cliche....when in doubt....shout! The last thing you
> >> need is a raid on your home at 3:00 AM from men in black swat suits,
> >> hauling you, your loved ones, your computers and your dog away for
> >> something you were not aware of doing being illegal!
>
>
> I guess civil rights and the first 10 amendments of the constitution
> mean nothing anymore right?
>
>
THE SECRET SERVICE IS THE EXECUTIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY TASKED WITH
THE ENFORCEMENT OF COMPUTER CRIMES. They along with the FBI and others
are involved and will soon be involved you and I will ahve no control
over......please visit the library of congress and look at the recent
executive orders signed by the president...read carefully the recent
legislation on HSD and the the internet.... if you don't believe me, you
are all in for a shock....
Be on guard!
Drew Lawson
> The internet as we know it today will soon be forgotten. It is important
> that we maintain law and order to have peace in our society. It is
> important that we not abuse the technology...for it has been good to us.
>
> Please disregard those out there that cannot understand the importance
> as to why there aare laws to protect the innocent and the good.
You don't need to see his papers.
These aren't the droids you're looking for.
Drew "move along" Lawson
--
Drew Lawson | If you're not part of the solution,
dla...@aimnet.com | you're part of the precipitate
James Vernon Allison
All your life, you have probably been told that you have to do
things like pay income taxes, pay Social Security taxes, get a license
to drive, register and insure your car, get title insurance on your
home and pay property taxes, just to mention a few. We think we must
do whatever the government tells us to do and are subject (slave)
to all their rules and regulations. We actually believe that the government
has the power to tell us what to do and how to do it and we live in
fear of the consequences if we disobey. Congress keeps passing laws
that control and restrict our every movement and take away our Rights
and Freedom and then they tell us that it's for our own protection.
The amazing thing is that we let them do this to us. The government
has almost total control of America and its people. Through the use
of your Social Security number they know your every move. Our telephones
are being tapped and our conversations are being monitored. Video
cameras are being put up on street corners all over America. This
is not Freedom! This is reminiscent of George Orwell's book, 1984,
where "Big Brother" is watching.
This is not what our Forefathers intended when they founded America
and created our Constitution over 200 years ago. Unfortunately, very
few people have ever read the Constitution. Too many Americans, today,
have absolutely no clue as to what their Rights are and their idea
of Freedom is being able to pick out what ever movie they choose at
the video super store. People still believe that America is a free
country and that we, Americans, still have Rights. We have very little
Freedom and very few Rights left. The sad thing is that most people
don't realize they've lost their Rights because they never knew what
they were to begin with. There are those people who know that the
government is taking away their Rights but they just feel helpless
to do anything about it. Then we have those people who know what's
going on and they just don't care. They just don't have time to worry
about Rights and Freedom anymore because they're too busy, working
long, hard hours, trying to make enough money to pay all their taxes,
insurance and registrations to worry about their Freedom.
When America was founded, the government did not control the
People. The People controlled the government. Our "system" of government,
today, does not even remotely resemble its original concept. How did
we get so far off track and allow the government to take control?
This change did not happen overnight. It was a slow process, like
the hands on a clock, moving ever so slowly that you never really
notice the change. These changes started many years ago, and just
a few small laws were passed. The people may have protested but eventually
they learned to live with it. The next generation grew up with these
old laws in place and then more laws were passed and a few more Rights
were taken away. This is how it continued. Each generation, the government
would make some more small changes and the People would get used to
them, never really noticing any major changes. It's time to open your
eyes and see what's going on!
The pages at http://www.doitnow.com/~tickler will help explain what is
happening in America today. They will give you a basic understanding of your
Rights and how the government has tried to take them all away. The information
you will read may sound "unbelievable" or even "impossible" and will
inevitably invoke skepticism in many. All the information contained therein
can be verified. Believe what you read and tell others what you have read.
Our Constitution and our Freedom are in jeopardy of being lost forever.
We, The People, must come together and regain our Rights as free Sovereign
Citizens of these united States of America. Our children and their
future depend on us. The time for action is now!
Jol Silversmith
In article <5dv73e$r...@in2.doitnow.com>, tic...@doitnow.com (James Vernon
Allison) wrote:
> The pages at http://www.doitnow.com/~tickler will help explain what is
> happening in America today.
No. All they do is parrot the usual extremist lies, misrepresentations,
and unreliable research.
For example:
>"It will be sufficient to observe briefly, that the sovereignties in Europe,
>and particularly in England, exist on feudal principles. That system considers
>the prince as the sovereign, and the people as his subjects; it regards his
>person as the object of allegiance... No such ideas obtain here; at the
>revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the
>sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects... and
>have none to govern but themselves..." Chisholm v. Georgia, Dallas' Supreme
>Court Reports, Vol. 2, Pages 471, 472 (1793)
>
>Each individual, at least so far as respects his unalienable rights is his
>own sovereign.
In addition to the quote being taken out of context, the next line of
Chisholm indicates that this is not so: "[T]he citizens of America are
equal as fellow citizens, and as _joint_tenants_ in the sovereignty."
(emphasis added)
Or another example:
>This is where Sovereign Citizenship comes in. As a Citizen, most IRS tax laws
>simply won't apply to you. You won't have to hope that congress "gives you a
>break." You won't have to change the tide of public opinion to keep what you
>earn. You'll simply use the law, as it's written, to your advantage, instead
>of allowing it to be used advantageously against you. It's perfectly alright
>to do this. Even the federal courts approve:
>
>"Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as
>possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the
>Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes."
>Helvering v. Gregory, Federal Reporter, 2nd series, Vol. 69, Page 810 (1934)
Similarly to the above example, this quote is taken out of context to
distort the meaning. In this case, Gregory transfered the assets of a
corporation to a new corporation, created for the purpose of reducing
taxes by issuing the transferred assets to Gregory as a dividend. The
appeals court ruled, immediately before the above quote, that taxpayers
may intentionally take advantage of loopholes in tax law: "[A]
transaction, otherwise within an exception of the tax law, does not lose
its immunity, because it is actuated by a desire to avoid, or, if one
choose, to evade, taxation." This case had nothing to do with the "issue"
of whether "sovereign citizens" under law have an obligation to pay taxes.
Further, the decision in 69 F.2d 809 is not good law because the case was
later affirmed by the Supreme Court. Justice Sutherland wrote for a
unanimous court that the issue in this case was merely "[t]he legal right
of a taxpayer to decrease the amount of what otherwise would be his taxes,
or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits." 293 U.S. 465,
469 (1935).
--
Jol Andrew Silversmith __________________________ silv...@law.harvard.edu
http://www.nyx.net/~jsilvers/home.html __________________ jsil...@nyx.net
Any opinions are my own, and should not be construed as legal advice, etc.
Shauna Lemons
> Rights and how the government has tried to take them all away. The information
> you will read may sound "unbelievable" or even "impossible" and will
> inevitably invoke skepticism in many. All the information contained therein
> can be verified. Believe what you read and tell others what you have read.
>
> Our Constitution and our Freedom are in jeopardy of being lost forever.
> We, The People, must come together and regain our Rights as free Sovereign
> Citizens of these united States of America. Our children and their
> future depend on us. The time for action is now!
>
> http://www.doitnow.com/~tickler
Please Please stop crossed posting about this ok. it has nothing to do
with what we talk about in alt.folklore.ghost-stories and I dought it
has much to do with alot of the other stuff you are cross posting to so
please stop doing this.
Shauna
LIBERATOR
Americans, I fear for you and I.
Please do me a favor, pick up a book called "World Orders, Old and New",
by Noam Chomsky. Thanks.
If you knew what the future was bringing, you would get a gun and
baracade yourself in your house from the government. Our freedom is
deeply in trouble. Greed is what's running this country(as if you havent
noticed yet), and those whose lives arent "productive means" to the
rich, are going to be removed or enslaved.
The government is purposely being lenient on criminals and letting them
out of jail so they cause more tension in society which gives the
government a reason to stomp down and cast more laws giving them more
control over us. And the fear generated causes us to separate from each
other more and more. The court systems have purposely been flawed, this
was planned years ago. Believe it?
The plan entails severing the people using media(press, tv, radio,
newspapers) and creating extreme tension between the races of which
there eventually is going to be a major riot, or revolution. They know
by letting criminals out on "technicalities" they will re-commit the
crimes they previously had, and this will build up, the general public
will become extremely fearful, and the general public allows their
rights to be retracted by the government thinking that the laws that
they cast will bind the criminals, which clearly will not. The laws have
only one purpose, to get you to a point where you cannot defend yourself
when the government wants to take direct control over your life. Where
you go, what you do, when you do it, and if they can what you believe.
Believe me? Please, for your sake, do....
How could you not? Look at technology, how it has skyrocketed. Now why
has'nt society healed, why hasnt the government used what they know to
heal those who cant heal themselves? Because its not profitable.
Are there ethics to dominating those who cannot assume a profitable
life?
Should the rich man care about the poor man? DOES HE? Look at our
society and there is your answer.
Those who could not excel in school, and achieve a high academic
standing, are the ones the government doesnt care about. They will not
be "Profitable entitys to ANYONE", so the government doesnt care about
them, and quite frankly see's them as a hinderance. They bogg the
profitable machine, and are a hassle to the rich corporate leaders(who
are the government)who only want to see themselves get more money than
their corporate buddy next to him. But what about the guy who didnt get
the college education to get the high paying job, the guy who doesnt
want to hurt anyone. Couldnt they sacrafice just a little of their
massive incomes to give a little more money to the lower guy on the
totem pole?
I would think if they believed in GOD they would. Ethically it would be
the right thing to do to give $10,000 more a year to the guy that makes
$20,000 dollars a year. But that $10,000 has to come off of his
$1,004,000 a year, and that would maybe cost him a vacation out of the 3
he takes a year. See what I mean about ethics, if their were some, these
guys wouldnt be doing what they have been doing to the middle class.
These corporate leaders(government) quite frankly I have found don't
believe in GOD, in any form such as I could see. They firmly believe
that their profits make them SUPERIOR, and they should have control of
the world. If you are not profitable in your life to someone, some
corporation, some business, you eventually will not have a place in this
world. The Corporate Structure, will have so many laws in place, that
you will not be able to move without permission. Believe it? Please
start. Its happening.
Population control. A highly desired element of these industry leaders.
All of the post WWII wars were population control wars. Look at them,
you know its true. Think about it. Korea? Viet Nam? Why?
How can the average American citizen have absolute proof that we need to
be engaged in combat to protect "our interest's" (which are corporate
interests, a possible threat to their profits)? We cant, and the "High
Elite" don't want us to be capable of that. Shit, we wouldnt fight if we
knew that it wasnt right to be in battle just for someones profitable
interests. It wouldnt really be ethical, would it?
Anyways, I could go on and on, but if you want hardcore proof, read this
book, it's hot off the presses, and I wouldnt be suprised if Noam
Chomsky life is soon in danger.
Again, "World Orders, Old and New", by Noam Chomsky. He is a professor
at MIT(Massachusettes Institute of Technology). Do yourself two favors,
read this book, and be nice to someone you wanted to be mean to.
Kaitlin
<SNIP>
>The government is purposely being lenient on criminals and letting them
>out of jail so they cause more tension in society which gives the
>government a reason to stomp down and cast more laws giving them more
>control over us. And the fear generated causes us to separate from each
>other more and more. The court systems have purposely been flawed, this
>was planned years ago. Believe it?
>
ghosts or folk-stories. I think it is something that we all should
fear. The government for years has tried to invade our peace and
freedom. That's evident. It isn't some new idea that has never occured
any of before. The government is a prime example of power hungry
individuals. They hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth
ignorant people are more helpless than educated ones. We have aloud
ourselves to be treated this way for years, and we never once tried to
stop it. Not really. Part of the problem is laws themselves. They were
meant to be amended, or even taken away. Yet most of them haven't. As
for the law purposely letting out crimnals to create total anarchy,
well what are we to do? We have let the government control us for this
long we are basically stuck. They only way for us to stop it is t
revolt. But isn't that exactly what they want? As you said they want
us to create a revolution. It's a no win situation.
<SNIP>
>I would think if they believed in GOD they would. Ethically it would be
>the right thing to do to give $10,000 more a year to the guy that makes
>$20,000 dollars a year. But that $10,000 has to come off of his
>$1,004,000 a year, and that would maybe cost him a vacation out of the 3
>he takes a year. See what I mean about ethics, if their were some, these
>guys wouldnt be doing what they have been doing to the middle class.
>
>These corporate leaders(government) quite frankly I have found don't
>believe in GOD, in any form such as I could see. They firmly believe
>that their profits make them SUPERIOR, and they should have control of
>the world. If you are not profitable in your life to someone, some
>corporation, some business, you eventually will not have a place in this
>world. The Corporate Structure, will have so many laws in place, that
>you will not be able to move without permission. Believe it? Please
>start. Its happening.
This I also do not agree with. Belief in God does not make on person
more corrupt than the other. I agree that I bet most of them don't.
But some of the most religious men have been corrupted. Look at the
Crusades. All done in the name of God. It was unfair and unjust, yet
it was done in the name of the Lord, so that makes it okay. I think
not. Belief in God is a personal level. The people in the government
don't treat us the way they do because they don't believe in God. They
treat us the way they do because they *can*.
>Population control. A highly desired element of these industry leaders.
>All of the post WWII wars were population control wars. Look at them,
>you know its true. Think about it. Korea? Viet Nam? Why?
Population control is something we should seriously look at. Soon all
the resources in this world will be used up. What will the children of
the future live off of. We want to have kids, but we aren't willing to
portect our Earth so they can live? That in a way is having children
but not willing to take care of them. I am not saying that the
government should enforce population control. Yes it is an invasion on
our privacy. But if we want to ensure the contrinuance of the human
species, we have to watch all of our actions very carefully, including
this one.
Kaite :)
Hlafen T Heffelberger
On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 17:08:15 GMT, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin)
wrote:
>I think it is something that we all should fear. The government for
>years has tried to invade our peace and freedom. That's evident.
You are quite right. It's time for a more liberal government, a
government which supports the needs of the people.
>The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals. They
>hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people are
>more helpless than educated ones.
This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.
>We have aloud ourselves to be treated this way for years, and we never
>once tried to stop it. Not really. Part of the problem is laws themselves.
>They were meant to be amended, or even taken away. Yet most of them
>haven't.
I'm not sure that laws were meant to be amended. I thought the
intention was to put the law in place for ever?
>As for the law purposely letting out crimnals to create total anarchy,
>well what are we to do? We have let the government control us for this
>long we are basically stuck. They only way for us to stop it is to
>revolt. But isn't that exactly what they want? As you said they want
>us to create a revolution.
Yes, the government obviously want us to have a revolution. That gives
them the excuse to bring in more laws which is what they want to do.
This will provoke another revolution and so it goes on. That way there
will always be a government.
>But some of the most religious men have been corrupted. Look at the
>Crusades. It was unfair and unjust,
What was unfair about it?
>Population control is something we should seriously look at. Soon all
>the resources in this world will be used up. What will the children of
>the future live off of.
I disagree. We can always grow more food. I favour sea-farming on a
large scale, especially whales. Properly bred, whales would supply
more of our needs than beef does at present. We could also breed
dolphins in the inland lakes. We won't go hungry if we are a little
more creative.
>I am not saying that the government should enforce population control.
>Yes it is an invasion on our privacy. But if we want to ensure the
>contrinuance of the human species, we have to watch all of our actions
>very carefully, including this one.
A lot of people are watching this activity very carefully.
Kaitlin
h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk (Hlafen T Heffelberger) wrote:
>On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 17:08:15 GMT, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin)
>wrote:
>
>
>>I think it is something that we all should fear. The government for
>>years has tried to invade our peace and freedom. That's evident.
>
>You are quite right. It's time for a more liberal government, a
>government which supports the needs of the people.
>
>>The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals. They
>>hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people are
>>more helpless than educated ones.
>
>This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
>in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.
>
I totally agree with you here. People should rule. We should have a
say so in what happens.
>>We have aloud ourselves to be treated this way for years, and we never
>>once tried to stop it. Not really. Part of the problem is laws themselves.
>>They were meant to be amended, or even taken away. Yet most of them
>>haven't.
>
>I'm not sure that laws were meant to be amended. I thought the
>intention was to put the law in place for ever?
>
Yes, but take the amendent the right to bare arms. (Amendment 2 or 3
if I am I right, probably not though). That was for people to protect
ourselves from ther English during the days after the Revolution. Now
it only creates a problem. I am not totally disagring with you. In
fact, you are probably more right about all this than I am. What do I
am know? I am only a fifteen year old female. Yet, I still think that
some of the Consitution should be changed. It served it's purpose long
ago, but now we no longer need it.
>>As for the law purposely letting out crimnals to create total anarchy,
>>well what are we to do? We have let the government control us for this
>>long we are basically stuck. They only way for us to stop it is to
>>revolt. But isn't that exactly what they want? As you said they want
>>us to create a revolution.
>
>Yes, the government obviously want us to have a revolution. That gives
>them the excuse to bring in more laws which is what they want to do.
>This will provoke another revolution and so it goes on. That way there
>will always be a government.
>
Exactly. That's the sad part of our situation. There really isn't any
way to over come it. Unless, that is, the government is eventually
abolished. But how can it be if we the people have no control or power
in it?
>>But some of the most religious men have been corrupted. Look at the
>>Crusades. It was unfair and unjust,
>
>What was unfair about it?
>
The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God. God, if
there is one, wouldn't want us to kill in order to spread his word. In
the Bible is says to spread the word by example. Yet, the Bible is
open to many intreptations, so I could be wrong. I just don't think it
was right for war ro break out over God. He is there to give us peace
of mind and to help us when we can't go on. The Crusades (am I
spelling this correctly?) were started to make people have this same
belief. Towards the end, those fighting lost sight of that. They
turned it into a land gaining, plundering, money making ordeal. So
many lives were lost. Those lives could have been saved if people
would only learn to understand that this world contains all types.
Maybe the people who don't believe in a certain God won't go to Heaven
when they die. But it isn't right to go about and force something upon
them. They believe in what they want by choice, and if they don't go
to Heaven, then they don't go. We go through life and everything we do
will catch up with us at the end. But I don't mean to preach here, I
am sorry I am way off. I get easily carried away :)
>>Population control is something we should seriously look at. Soon all
>>the resources in this world will be used up. What will the children of
>>the future live off of.
>
>I disagree. We can always grow more food. I favour sea-farming on a
>large scale, especially whales. Properly bred, whales would supply
>more of our needs than beef does at present. We could also breed
>dolphins in the inland lakes. We won't go hungry if we are a little
>more creative.
>
True, I never saw it that way. I still think we should watch ourselves
carefully. But remember, if the water is polluted, none of that can be
done. I know you were stating an example, and I think you are right. I
just think we should be more aware, that's all.
Xiu Li
On Sat, 15 Feb 1997, Kaitlin wrote:
> >Yes, the government obviously want us to have a revolution. That gives
> >them the excuse to bring in more laws which is what they want to do.
> >This will provoke another revolution and so it goes on. That way there
> >will always be a government.
> >
> Exactly. That's the sad part of our situation. There really isn't any
> way to over come it. Unless, that is, the government is eventually
> abolished. But how can it be if we the people have no control or power
> in it?
This must be stretching it a bit. Do you mean a revolution like the
American Revolution or one like the Russian Revolution? The government
can survive perfectly well without a revolution, and is actually
necessary in order to maintain the well-being of may people in this
society. I am in total agreement that the government could be doing a
better job working for the people and not only for the rich ones, but I
disagree that it is the enemy.
> >What was unfair about it?
> >
> The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God. God, if
> there is one, wouldn't want us to kill in order to spread his word. In
> the Bible is says to spread the word by example. Yet, the Bible is
> open to many intreptations, so I could be wrong. I just don't think it
> was right for war ro break out over God. He is there to give us peace
> of mind and to help us when we can't go on. The Crusades (am I
> spelling this correctly?) were started to make people have this same
> belief. Towards the end, those fighting lost sight of that. They
> turned it into a land gaining, plundering, money making ordeal. So
> many lives were lost. Those lives could have been saved if people
> would only learn to understand that this world contains all types.
> Maybe the people who don't believe in a certain God won't go to Heaven
> when they die. But it isn't right to go about and force something upon
> them. They believe in what they want by choice, and if they don't go
> to Heaven, then they don't go. We go through life and everything we do
> will catch up with us at the end. But I don't mean to preach here, I
> am sorry I am way off. I get easily carried away :)
It is entirely debateable whether the Crusades were for God. It is
more probable that the Crusades were a way for the ruling class to gain
economically and a way for the soldiers to glorify themselves. The
lowest soldiers (the ones who actually died) probably believed that they
were glorifying God, but I do not believe they were guilty of all the
atrocities committed there. I do not believe in God, but if God exists,
this is only his fault in the sense that his name was exploited.
I think you guys are having a wonderful discussion, by the way.
Thanks,
Xiu Li
Kerry l. Molineux
Kennon Baird
h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk (Hlafen T Heffelberger) wrote:
>On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 17:08:15 GMT, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin)
>wrote:
>>I think it is something that we all should fear. The government for
>>years has tried to invade our peace and freedom. That's evident.
>You are quite right. It's time for a more liberal government, a
>government which supports the needs of the people.
Goverment cannot support or supply anyone with anything, because it
produces nothing.
>>The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals. They
>>hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people are
>>more helpless than educated ones.
The government knows this. Why else do you think the government-run
schools have become so inefficient?
>This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
>in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.
Socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried. Yes, even in Canada
and Scandinavia.
If you care to observe the nations of the world, you will readily see
that those nations which allow the most individual freedom are the
most prosperous. Life is better in a free society. I trust this is not
a shock to you.
>>As for the law purposely letting out crimnals to create total anarchy,
>>well what are we to do? We have let the government control us for this
>>long we are basically stuck. They only way for us to stop it is to
>>revolt. But isn't that exactly what they want? As you said they want
>>us to create a revolution.
"America is at that awkward stage. It is too late to work within the
system, but too early to shoot the bastards". - Claire Wolfe
>Yes, the government obviously want us to have a revolution. That gives
>them the excuse to bring in more laws which is what they want to do.
>This will provoke another revolution and so it goes on. That way there
>will always be a government.
If they really wanted us to have a revolution, they wouldn't be trying
so hard to take away all of our weapons.
Remember Tienamen Square?
Those brave people wanted freedom, but the government had all the
guns.
>>Population control is something we should seriously look at. Soon all
>>the resources in this world will be used up. What will the children of
>>the future live off of.
The resources of the world will not soon be used up. Those who will
live in the future will solve their own problems, as mankind always
has.
>I disagree. We can always grow more food. I favour sea-farming on a
>large scale, especially whales. Properly bred, whales would supply
>more of our needs than beef does at present. We could also breed
>dolphins in the inland lakes. We won't go hungry if we are a little
>more creative.
Don't let John Denver hear you say that! He'll have Cousteau on your
ass!
>>I am not saying that the government should enforce population control.
>>Yes it is an invasion on our privacy. But if we want to ensure the
>>contrinuance of the human species, we have to watch all of our actions
>>very carefully, including this one.
>A lot of people are watching this activity very carefully.
I like to watch that kind of activity, too!
Kennon
BCDavis
WHAT THE HECK DOES ALL THIS "SINISTER" STUFF HAVE TO DO WITH JIM CARREY?
Listen, kids... I *thought* we were talkin' JC stuff here... Who changed
the rules?
Michael Emberley
alt.drugs,alt.caffeine,alt.elvis.king,alt.fan.actors,alt.fan.brad-pitt,alt.fan.david-bowie,alt.fan.elton-john,alt.fan.elvis-presley,alt.fan.james-bond,alt.fan.jim-carrey,alt.fan.jimi-hendrix,alt.fan.john-denver,alt.fan.kinks,alt.fan.letterman,alt.fan.mado
nna,alt.fan.monty-python,alt.fan.oj-simpson,alt.fan.pam-anderson,alt.fan.sting,alt.fishing,alt.folklore.ghost-stories,alt.folklore.urban,uk.misc,alt.food,alt.food.chocolate,alt.freedom,alt.gambling,soc.culture.british
Followup-To: alt.cuddle,alt.culture.alaska,alt.culture.hawaii,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.kuwait,alt.culture.us.1970s,alt.culture.usenet,alt.current-events.usa,demon.local,alt.cybercafes,alt.cyberspace,alt.dreams,alt.dreams.castaneda,alt.dreams.lucid
,alt.drugs,alt.caffeine,alt.elvis.king,alt.fan.actors,alt.fan.brad-pitt,alt.fan.david-bowie,alt.fan.elton-john,alt.fan.elvis-presley,alt.fan.james-bond,alt.fan.jim-carrey,alt.fan.jimi-hendrix,alt.fan.john-denver,alt.fan.kinks,alt.fan.letterman,alt.fan.mad
onna,alt.fan.monty-python,alt.fan.oj-simpson,alt.fan.pam-anderson,alt.fan.sting,alt.fishing,alt.folklore.ghost-stories,alt.folklore.urban,uk.misc,alt.food,alt.food.chocolate,alt.freedom,alt.gambling,soc.culture.british
References: <32eda73e...@news.mel.aone.net.au> <32ED7D...@pipeline.com> <32F3DF...@earthlink.net> <32F4E3...@whitehouse.gov> <32FD25...@earthlink.net> <5dv73e$r...@in2.doitnow.com> <3304FC...@dns.olympus.net> <33059BC6.5A94@HOTMAIL
.COM> <3305ea6a...@news.mindspring.com> <330619d0...@news.demon.co.uk>
Organization: York University
Reply-To: yu16...@yorku.ca
Distribution:
Hlafen T Heffelberger (h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 17:08:15 GMT, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin)
: wrote:
:
:
: >I think it is something that we all should fear. The government for
: >years has tried to invade our peace and freedom. That's evident.
: You are quite right. It's time for a more liberal government, a
: government which supports the needs of the people.
It is rather humourous to notice how you've used his conservative argument
against him... :)
: >The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals. They
: >hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people are
: >more helpless than educated ones.
: This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
: in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.
Bwahahaha! You think *you* can make socialism work? How many times must a
scheme fail, resulting in various forms of oppression, before people admit
that Marx was a dreamer?? Why not try to attain Plato's Perfect Form while
you're at it?
: >We have aloud ourselves to be treated this way for years, and we never
: >once tried to stop it. Not really. Part of the problem is laws themselves.
: >They were meant to be amended, or even taken away. Yet most of them
: >haven't.
: I'm not sure that laws were meant to be amended. I thought the
: intention was to put the law in place for ever?
True 'nuff. He was probably trying to make some point about the "temporary
measure" of income tax...
: Yes, the government obviously want us to have a revolution. That gives
: them the excuse to bring in more laws which is what they want to do.
: This will provoke another revolution and so it goes on. That way there
: will always be a government.
Ah, another Anarchist promoting his cause on the Internet. My cup of irony
runneth over...
: >But some of the most religious men have been corrupted. Look at the
: >Crusades. It was unfair and unjust,
: What was unfair about it?
Unfair? Being slaughtered by foreigners because you don't share their
religion? It *is* a little harsh, don't you think..?
--
Michael "Lab-Rat" Emberley, President/Co-Founder, FTTV Fan Club
---------------------------------------------------------------
"If you're cooking poultry/Make sure it's not pink!"
-mr. nobody, "Salmonella"
---------------------------------------------------------------
FTTV - YOUR STATION FOR FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT
Michael Emberley
alt.drugs,alt.caffeine,alt.elvis.king,alt.fan.actors,alt.fan.brad-pitt,alt.fan.david-bowie,alt.fan.elton-john,alt.fan.elvis-presley,alt.fan.james-bond,alt.fan.jim-carrey,alt.fan.jimi-hendrix,alt.fan.john-denver,alt.fan.kinks,alt.fan.letterman,alt.fan.mado
nna,alt.fan.monty-python,alt.fan.oj-simpson,alt.fan.pam-anderson,alt.fan.sting,alt.fishing,alt.folklore.ghost-stories,alt.folklore.urban,uk.misc,alt.food,alt.food.chocolate,alt.freedom,alt.gambling,soc.culture.british
Followup-To: alt.cuddle,alt.culture.alaska,alt.culture.hawaii,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.kuwait,alt.culture.us.1970s,alt.culture.usenet,alt.current-events.usa,demon.local,alt.cybercafes,alt.cyberspace,alt.dreams,alt.dreams.castaneda,alt.dreams.lucid
,alt.drugs,alt.caffeine,alt.elvis.king,alt.fan.actors,alt.fan.brad-pitt,alt.fan.david-bowie,alt.fan.elton-john,alt.fan.elvis-presley,alt.fan.james-bond,alt.fan.jim-carrey,alt.fan.jimi-hendrix,alt.fan.john-denver,alt.fan.kinks,alt.fan.letterman,alt.fan.mad
onna,alt.fan.monty-python,alt.fan.oj-simpson,alt.fan.pam-anderson,alt.fan.sting,alt.fishing,alt.folklore.ghost-stories,alt.folklore.urban,uk.misc,alt.food,alt.food.chocolate,alt.freedom,alt.gambling,soc.culture.british
References: <32eda73e...@news.mel.aone.net.au> <32ED7D...@pipeline.com> <32F3DF...@earthlink.net> <32F4E3...@whitehouse.gov> <32FD25...@earthlink.net> <5dv73e$r...@in2.doitnow.com> <3304FC...@dns.olympus.net> <33059BC6.5A94@HOTMAIL
.COM> <3305ea6a...@news.mindspring.com> <330619d0...@news.demon.co.uk> <3306245d...@news.mindspring.com>
Organization: York University
Reply-To: yu16...@yorku.ca
Distribution:
Kaitlin (grd...@mindspring.com) wrote:
: h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk (Hlafen T Heffelberger) wrote:
:
: >This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
: >in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.
: >
: I totally agree with you here. People should rule. We should have a
: say so in what happens.
Socialism = government by groups.
Democracy = [from the Greek] government by the people.
Am I near a point? Yes... People do have a say-so in a democracy, but not
necessarily in socialism. Too bad the US is a Republic! :P
: >I'm not sure that laws were meant to be amended. I thought the
: >intention was to put the law in place for ever?
: >
: Yes, but take the amendent the right to bare arms. (Amendment 2 or 3
: if I am I right, probably not though). That was for people to protect
: ourselves from ther English during the days after the Revolution. Now
: it only creates a problem.
Yes! It's time you Yanks yanked guns! :)
> I am not totally disagring with you. In
: fact, you are probably more right about all this than I am. What do I
: am know? I am only a fifteen year old female.
For one thing, you know enough to admit the possibility you
are wrong. This gives you more right to participate in this discussion
than anyone else here!
: >What was unfair about it?
: The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God. God, if
: there is one, wouldn't want us to kill in order to spread his word. In
: the Bible is says to spread the word by example. Yet, the Bible is
: open to many intreptations, so I could be wrong.
God says: "Nope, you're absolutely right. That's one of the few ideas that
haven't been screwed up in translation."
Michael Emberley
alt.drugs,alt.caffeine,alt.elvis.king,alt.fan.actors,alt.fan.brad-pitt,alt.fan.david-bowie,alt.fan.elton-john,alt.fan.elvis-presley,alt.fan.james-bond,alt.fan.jim-carrey,alt.fan.jimi-hendrix,alt.fan.john-denver,alt.fan.kinks,alt.fan.letterman,alt.fan.mado
nna,alt.fan.monty-python,alt.fan.oj-simpson,alt.fan.pam-anderson,alt.fan.sting,alt.fishing,alt.folklore.ghost-stories,alt.folklore.urban,uk.misc,alt.food,alt.food.chocolate,alt.freedom,alt.gambling,soc.culture.british
Followup-To: alt.cuddle,alt.culture.alaska,alt.culture.hawaii,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.kuwait,alt.culture.us.1970s,alt.culture.usenet,alt.current-events.usa,demon.local,alt.cybercafes,alt.cyberspace,alt.dreams,alt.dreams.castaneda,alt.dreams.lucid
,alt.drugs,alt.caffeine,alt.elvis.king,alt.fan.actors,alt.fan.brad-pitt,alt.fan.david-bowie,alt.fan.elton-john,alt.fan.elvis-presley,alt.fan.james-bond,alt.fan.jim-carrey,alt.fan.jimi-hendrix,alt.fan.john-denver,alt.fan.kinks,alt.fan.letterman,alt.fan.mad
onna,alt.fan.monty-python,alt.fan.oj-simpson,alt.fan.pam-anderson,alt.fan.sting,alt.fishing,alt.folklore.ghost-stories,alt.folklore.urban,uk.misc,alt.food,alt.food.chocolate,alt.freedom,alt.gambling,soc.culture.british
References: <32eda73e...@news.mel.aone.net.au> <32ED7D...@pipeline.com> <32F3DF...@earthlink.net> <32F4E3...@whitehouse.gov> <32FD25...@earthlink.net> <5dv73e$r...@in2.doitnow.com> <3304FC...@dns.olympus.net> <33059BC6.5A94@HOTMAIL
.COM> <3305ea6a...@news.mindspring.com> <330619d0...@news.demon.co.uk> <5e5j1r$mub$1...@gryphon.phoenix.net>
Organization: York University
Reply-To: yu16...@yorku.ca
Distribution:
Kennon Baird (k...@phoenix.net) wrote:
:
: >This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
: >in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.
:
: Socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried. Yes, even in Canada
: and Scandinavia.
Hey ya hoser, wanna educate a dumb canuck? When exactly was socialism
tried here, eh?
: >>As for the law purposely letting out crimnals to create total anarchy,
: >>well what are we to do? We have let the government control us for this
: >>long we are basically stuck. They only way for us to stop it is to
: >>revolt. But isn't that exactly what they want? As you said they want
: >>us to create a revolution.
: "America is at that awkward stage. It is too late to work within the
: system, but too early to shoot the bastards". - Claire Wolfe
Actually, right now it's at that awkward stage right before a civil war...
Michael Emberley
alt.drugs,alt.caffeine,alt.elvis.king,alt.fan.actors,alt.fan.brad-pitt,alt.fan.david-bowie,alt.fan.elton-john,alt.fan.elvis-presley,alt.fan.james-bond,alt.fan.jim-carrey,alt.fan.jimi-hendrix,alt.fan.john-denver,alt.fan.kinks,alt.fan.letterman,alt.fan.mado
nna,alt.fan.monty-python,alt.fan.oj-simpson,alt.fan.pam-anderson,alt.fan.sting,alt.fishing,alt.folklore.ghost-stories,alt.folklore.urban,uk.misc,alt.food,alt.food.chocolate,alt.freedom,alt.gambling,soc.culture.british
Followup-To: alt.cuddle,alt.culture.alaska,alt.culture.hawaii,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.kuwait,alt.culture.us.1970s,alt.culture.usenet,alt.current-events.usa,demon.local,alt.cybercafes,alt.cyberspace,alt.dreams,alt.dreams.castaneda,alt.dreams.lucid
,alt.drugs,alt.caffeine,alt.elvis.king,alt.fan.actors,alt.fan.brad-pitt,alt.fan.david-bowie,alt.fan.elton-john,alt.fan.elvis-presley,alt.fan.james-bond,alt.fan.jim-carrey,alt.fan.jimi-hendrix,alt.fan.john-denver,alt.fan.kinks,alt.fan.letterman,alt.fan.mad
onna,alt.fan.monty-python,alt.fan.oj-simpson,alt.fan.pam-anderson,alt.fan.sting,alt.fishing,alt.folklore.ghost-stories,alt.folklore.urban,uk.misc,alt.food,alt.food.chocolate,alt.freedom,alt.gambling,soc.culture.british
References: <32eda73e...@news.mel.aone.net.au> <32ED7D...@pipeline.com> <32F3DF...@earthlink.net> <32F4E3...@whitehouse.gov> <32FD25...@earthlink.net> <5dv73e$r...@in2.doitnow.com> <3304FC...@dns.olympus.net> <33059BC6.5A94@HOTMAIL
.COM> <3305ea6a...@news.mindspring.com> <330619d0...@news.demon.co.uk> <3306245d...@news.mindspring.com> <Pine.A41.3.95b.97021...@dante20.u.washington.edu>
Organization: York University
Reply-To: yu16...@yorku.ca
Distribution:
Xiu Li (s8...@u.washington.edu) wrote:
: atrocities committed there. I do not believe in God, but if God exists,
: this is only his fault in the sense that his name was exploited.
Of course! God claims no responsibility for "that foolishness" (his words,
not mine). In fact, he was never even consulted.
If he was human, he could've sued! :)
glynn bradley
In article <3306A7...@netins.net>, BCDavis <wda...@netins.net>
writes
>WHAT THE HECK DOES ALL THIS "SINISTER" STUFF HAVE TO DO WITH JIM CARREY?
>
>Listen, kids... I *thought* we were talkin' JC stuff here... Who changed
>the rules?
scuse me who is Jim Carrey.
--
KLEENEZE Independent agent.
A Growing business of *Your own*.
E-mail for details
glynn bradley
In article <5e6gh1$c...@sunburst.ccs.yorku.ca>, Michael Emberley
<yu16...@yorku.ca> writes
>Ah, another Anarchist promoting his cause on the Internet. My cup of irony
>runneth over...
>
>: >But some of the most religious men have been corrupted. Look at the
>: >Crusades. It was unfair and unjust,
>
>religion? It *is* a little harsh, don't you think..?
>
>
>
Michael "Lab-Rat" Emberley, President/Co-Founder, FTTV Fan Club
---------------------------------------------------------------
"If you're cooking poultry/Make sure it's not pink!"
-mr. nobody, "Salmonella"
---------------------------------------------------------------
FTTV - YOUR STATION FOR FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT
It you must x-post to demon.local please keep your .sig to four lines or
less.
thankyou.
Anthony Catalano
tic...@doitnow.com (James Vernon Allison) wrote:
> All your life, you have probably been told that you have to do
>things like pay income taxes, pay Social Security taxes, get a license
>to drive, register and insure your car, get title insurance on your
>home and pay property taxes, just to mention a few. We think we must
>do whatever the government tells us to do and are subject (slave)
>to all their rules and regulations. We actually believe that the government
>has the power to tell us what to do and how to do it and we live in
>fear of the consequences if we disobey.
etc......
Please stop crossposting. ( you probably spammed the universe and
will never read this but what the hell )
I am a right-winger, but I limit my posting HERE to subjects having to
do with Koogle, AMC Pacers and Light-Bright (tm).
You are an embarrasment to my side of the fence.
If you have a website, go figure out how to register it in on the
numerous search databases!!! Get edumacated!!!
- Tony catalano
John Griffin
In article <5e64jq$n...@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>,
Kerry l. Molineux <"avm...@primenet.com"@mailhost.primenet.com> wrote:
>Xiu Li wrote:
>> It is entirely debateable whether the Crusades were for God. It is
>> more probable that the Crusades were a way for the ruling class to gain
>> economically and a way for the soldiers to glorify themselves. The
>> lowest soldiers (the ones who actually died) probably believed that they
>> were glorifying God, but I do not believe they were guilty of all the
>> this is only his fault in the sense that his name was exploited.
The crusaders were mercenaries. They got to keep part of the loot.
The "God" bullshit was just a crutch to carry them through an
arduous journey - just as it is today.
>> I think you guys are having a wonderful discussion, by the way.
>> Thanks,
>> Xiu Li
>Could you be a little more clear on how this relates to the Kinks???
Yes. Kink George conceived the idea for two reasons: The aforementioned
loot, and he wanted the knights out of town so he could screw their
wives.
By the way...whoever started this thread was lazy. You left
out literally thousands of newsgroups. Maybe it was just an
oversight.
Jim
Excuse me but I learned to read at an early age, apparently you did not.
The subject of this newsgroup is chocolate. You can look it up in the
dictionary if you do not understand.
Jim
LIBERATOR <LIBERA...@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote in article
<33059B...@HOTMAIL.COM>...
Robert J. Stock
Hlafen T Heffelberger wrote:
>
> On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 17:08:15 GMT, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin)
> wrote:
>
> >I think it is something that we all should fear. The government for
> >years has tried to invade our peace and freedom. That's evident.
>
> You are quite right. It's time for a more liberal government, a
> government which supports the needs of the people.
I would prefer a government that let the people support their own needs.
> >The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals. They
> >hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people are
> >more helpless than educated ones.
Was it Jefferson who said, "it is not possible to be both ignorant and
free"?
> This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
> in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.
Yuck, not socialism. We don't have rabid right wing government, we
have a money-archy. The wealthy/powerful don't care what kind of
economic system we have, as long as they are at the top. They
usually prefer capitalism for them and socialism for the little guy.
> >We have aloud ourselves to be treated this way for years, and we never
> >once tried to stop it. Not really. Part of the problem is laws themselves.
> >They were meant to be amended, or even taken away. Yet most of them
> >haven't.
>
> I'm not sure that laws were meant to be amended. I thought the
> intention was to put the law in place for ever?
Laws are meant to be amended as the situation dictates. Even an
amendment to the US Constitution has been repealed. Wealthy
entities pay good money for legislation, they don't want it to
just disappear.
Kaitlin
"Robert J. Stock" <rjs...@dawg.delcoelect.com> wrote:
>Kaitlin wrote:
>>
>> h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk (Hlafen T Heffelberger) wrote:
>> >>The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals. They
>> >>hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people are
>> >>more helpless than educated ones.
>> >
>> >This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
>> >in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.
>> I totally agree with you here. People should rule. We should have a
>> say so in what happens.
>
>Yes, but do we need socialism to do this?
>
>> Yes, but take the amendent the right to bare arms. (Amendment 2 or 3
>> if I am I right, probably not though). That was for people to protect
>> ourselves from ther English during the days after the Revolution. Now
>> it only creates a problem. I am not totally disagring with you. In
>> fact, you are probably more right about all this than I am. What do I
>> am know? I am only a fifteen year old female. Yet, I still think that
>> some of the Consitution should be changed. It served it's purpose long
>> ago, but now we no longer need it.
>
>The second amendment:
>
>1) for self protection
>
>2) for hunting
>
>3) for making sure that the government remains sensitive to the needs of
>the people.
>
>I think the second amendment should stay as these are still vital.
>
>On a general note, yes, the constitution does need a major overhaul.
>
>> >>But some of the most religious men have been corrupted. Look at the
>> >>Crusades. It was unfair and unjust,
>> >
>> >What was unfair about it?
>> >
>> The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God. God, if
>
><snip>
>
>> am sorry I am way off. I get easily carried away :)
>
>Bigger fish getting smaller fish killed off. Both government
>and religion are used to control people.
>
>You sound pretty thoughtful for your age. You would also be surprised
>at
>how much more you might know than 36 year old men.
Thank you :) Sorry everyone, I didn't mean to go off on a lecture of
sorts. I have a habit of it. Anyways, I must say I learned alot from
all this, even if I did cause alot fo trouble. But that is what I am
good for *grin* Thanks for putting up with me! :)
Bigfoot
In article <3309ED...@dawg.delcoelect.com>, Robert J. Stock says...
Sinister? Sounds like and Alfred Hitchcock movie.
>Kaitlin wrote:
>> The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.I totally agree with you
>>here. People should rule. We should have a say so in what happens.
>Yes, but do we need socialism to do this?
Campaign finance reform would do the trick all by itself. Limit
all donations to individuals at $100 each and you're there.
(Hint: It'll never happen either. The corporations will bury
it quicker than they buried that Vincent Foster guy.)
>> That was for people to protect ourselves from the English
>>Now it only creates a problem.
Gun registration would be a sufficient solution if certain safegards and
assuraces are garunteed.
>>I am not totally disagring with you.
>>In fact, you are probably more right about all this than I am. What
>>do I am know? I am only a fifteen year old female.
I like you more and more. (And I'll like you more still when you're
a couple 'a 3 years older.)
>>Yet, I still think that some of the Consitution should be changed.
>>It served it's purpose long ago, but now we no longer need it.
AAAAHHHHH! Kaitlin, Hun! The Constitution/Bill of Rights is a
remarkable document. And one of it most endearing features are it's
enduring features. It may need a little amendment from time to time,
but it has worked fantastically well under the stress and strains
of an unfettered frontier rupublic all the way through this High-tech
madness we call modern times.
>I think the second amendment should stay as these are still vital.
Me too. I like guns (can't help it). It's a testosterone thing.
>On a general note, yes, the constitution does need a major overhaul.
I don't think so. What specifically is wrong with the Constitution?
>> The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God. God,
Pretty stupid, huh? Killing in the name of the creator.
>You sound pretty thoughtful for your age. You would also be surprised
>at how much more you might know than 36 year old men.
Amen. You go girl.
-Bigfoot
gumby
Kaitlin wrote:
>
> Haha! Nice reply. *grin* Thanks! Gotta love it :)
Shut the fuck up.
gumby
Kaitlin wrote:
>
> "Robert J. Stock" <rjs...@dawg.delcoelect.com> wrote:
>
> >Kaitlin wrote:
> >>
> >> h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk (Hlafen T Heffelberger) wrote:
> >> >>The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals. They
> >> >>hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people are
> >> >>more helpless than educated ones.
> >> >
> >> >This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
> >> I totally agree with you here. People should rule. We should have a
> >> say so in what happens.
> >
> >Yes, but do we need socialism to do this?
> >
> >> if I am I right, probably not though). That was for people to protect
> >> it only creates a problem. I am not totally disagring with you. In
> >> fact, you are probably more right about all this than I am. What do I
> >> some of the Consitution should be changed. It served it's purpose long
> >> ago, but now we no longer need it.
> >
> >
> >1) for self protection
> >
> >2) for hunting
> >
> >3) for making sure that the government remains sensitive to the needs of
> >the people.
> >
> >
> >
> >> >>Crusades. It was unfair and unjust,
> >> >
> >> >What was unfair about it?
> >> >
> >> The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God. God, if
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> am sorry I am way off. I get easily carried away :)
> >
> >Bigger fish getting smaller fish killed off. Both government
> >and religion are used to control people.
> >
> >at
> >how much more you might know than 36 year old men.
> sorts. I have a habit of it. Anyways, I must say I learned alot from
> all this, even if I did cause alot fo trouble. But that is what I am
> good for *grin* Thanks for putting up with me! :)
Fuck you asshole! Quit posting in newsgroups that aren't dedicated
to your favorite topics, fuckface, we don't take well to spammers,
DICKHEAD
glynn bradley
In article <330619d0...@news.demon.co.uk>, Hlafen T Heffelberger
<h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk> writes
>On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 17:08:15 GMT, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin)
>wrote:
>
>
>>I think it is something that we all should fear. The government for
>>years has tried to invade our peace and freedom. That's evident.
>
--
Credit Unions are here to stay.
Make sure you join today.
glynn bradley
In article <330619d0...@news.demon.co.uk>, Hlafen T Heffelberger
<h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk> writes
>On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 17:08:15 GMT, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin)
>wrote:
>
My brother, William Tarr, sent me a note about this discussion and asked
me to comment. I (and a friend) had Excimer Laser PRK performed 2 years
ago. I was about -5.75 and -6.25, my friend was about -3 and -2.5. I
don't know the technical terms, but I also had slight astigmatism. We
heard about it from a colleague, an oil worker who found wearing his own
glasses and then safety glasses on top of that very irritating. He was
so ecstatic about the op that we decided to make enquiries, and
eventually have it done. Due to our excellent results, various other
people I have told about it have since been zapped.
I went to the Optimax Clinic in London (am I allowed to say that ?) and
they did a very thorough examination. They measured many things such as
dryness of the eye and how wide the pupil dilates. We were both less
than the 7 mm Laser beam. The people there gave us a long talk and told
us about all the possible things which COULD go wrong, and the
statistical chances of them happening. We then had to take a multiple
choice questionnaire in order to prove that we had understood what we
were being told. (Before going to the clinic we had been sent
information and a video which detailed the operation and other
information.)
Optimax first perform the operation (if you need both eyes done) on the
less dominant eye. This is so that they can make any minor corrections
(due to different healing) on the dominant eye. I had my right eye done
in April 1995. My left eye was zapped in Sept 1995. I have since not
had to wear glasses or contact lenses. I apparently have 20/20 vision
and reduced astigmatism and have had no problems since then.
The procedure is constantly improving. First, the nurse puts
anaesthetic drops in your eye. Then the doctor uses things like reverse
eyelash curlers to hold your eye open. He does scrape away the surface,
as mentioned in a previous note. This is rather weird as you can see it
and you feel pressure but not pain. Then you have to look up into a red
dot and a green cross in a machine above your head ... the Excimer
laser. The machine goes click every second andthe doc tells you
beforehand how many seconds you will have to endure. I was 36 secs for
the bad eye, with another 6 secs for the astigmatism. When you look up,
the red dot becomes hazy, but you keep looking. The doctor holds your
head, but if the laser moves off target, it stops. Then the doc
squidges some ointment in your eye and sticks it closed with tape and
puts a patch on it.
You get painkillers and sleeping tablets and have to stay in a darkened
room for 24 hours. After that time, you take off the patch and you can
see the leaves on the tree and not just a green blob. It's very blurred
(from the scarring) but the distance is fine. You are initially far
sighted and then go back to (hopefully) 20/20 vision. The first week
there is a scratchy sensation, like a lens with a piece of grit under
it. This eases off quickly and you have regular check ups with a
consultant. Your eyes are sensitive to light initially. The blurring
reduces rapidly within the first month until you don't notice it, but
the consultant still checks up on it. I had no starring, no haloes,
etc. I can now scuba dive, sky dive, wake up in the morning and SEE !
I'd recommend it and so would my friend.
If anybody wishes to ask me more questions about the procedure, e-mail
me at s...@iname.com. At the time it cost 750 pounds for two eyes.
Optimax only perform this operation, and so they have managed to keep
costs down. Sorry for the lengthy description and I hope I didn't
sicken the squeamish.
Sarah-Jane Tarr
>
gumby
well then why did'nt you trim them, you fucking asshole?
Robert J. Stock
gumby
Michael P. Judge wrote:
Fuck Elton John, shut the hell up up and take your spam
like a man
Rainman
Kaitlin wrote:
>
> Haha! Nice reply. *grin* Thanks! Gotta love it :)I will give you a Quote Paraphrased a little as I didn't have it at hand
to copy. " For the first time in history, a civilised nation has achieved
total gun registration and control. This will make our streets safer and
allow the police to do their work more efficiently.
Adolf Hitler
Don't tell me we don't need our constitution and our bill of rights.!!
Do you think Hitlers Gestapo would have been able to slaughter 6 million
armed Jews?
Kaitlin
Michael P. Judge
Michael P. Judge
Bigfoot wrote:
>
> In article <330A50...@ix.netcom.com>, Michael P. Judge says...
>
> >Fuck Elton John, shut the hell up up and take your spam like a man
>
>
> Spam pizza? Might work.
>
> -Bigfoot
mmm nah too thick too long to chew.
Michael P. Judge
Steven Garman
[newsgroups trimmed to something more sensible]
Sat, 15 Feb 1997, Xiu Li <s8...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
/Sat, 15 Feb 1997, Kaitlin <grd...@mindspring.com> wrote:
/>h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk (Hlafen T Heffelberger) wrote:
/>>Yes, the government obviously want us to have a revolution. That gives
/>>them the excuse to bring in more laws which is what they want to do.
/>>This will provoke another revolution and so it goes on. That way there
/>>will always be a government.
/>
/>Exactly. That's the sad part of our situation. There really isn't any
/>way to over come it. Unless, that is, the government is eventually
/>abolished. But how can it be if we the people have no control or power
/>in it?
/
/This must be stretching it a bit. Do you mean a revolution like the
/American Revolution or one like the Russian Revolution? The government can
/survive perfectly well without a revolution, and is actually necessary in
/order to maintain the well-being of may people in this society. I am in
/total agreement that the government could be doing a better job working for
/the people and not only for the rich ones, but I disagree that it is the
/enemy.
You have a strange definition of "not an enemy" then. The fact that the
government works for the wealthy and not only marginalizes the poor, but
kills them in various matters, should make them your most sincere enemy.
Unless you are wealthy and are therefore protected by this system, then I
must ask:
Where is your sense of individuality and survival?
When you don't matter worth a damn to the rulers in the government, except
as connon fodder and various other roles that are essentially dehumanizing,
then I wonder what you really know and think about your relationship to
that gov.
No, I strongly suspect that your ignorance or acceptance of your peril at
the hands of the czars in your government (and related business interests)
is very strange and is probably uninformed. Few people want to be crushed
by a governmental colossus.
It is also an unsupported and unexamined assumption of yours that we need
the government to take care of us, like we are little children or something.
On the basis of responsible individualism, little oversight is needed. Take
charge of your own life and you cannot *help* but see the irrelevance of the
government. In fact, in that enlightened and responsible state of being,
you will find that government *as practiced* is a vast barrier to human
freedoms. Government is too often nothing more than a pack of vicious and
thieving little liars that are in it to ensure and grow their personal and
familial estates. Who really needs such a staggering load like that on
their backs?
/>>What was unfair about it?
/>
/>The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God. God, if
/>there is one, wouldn't want us to kill in order to spread his word. In the
/>Bible is says to spread the word by example. Yet, the Bible is open to
/>many intreptations, so I could be wrong. I just don't think it was right
/>for war ro break out over God. He is there to give us peace of mind and to
/>help us when we can't go on. The Crusades (am I spelling this correctly?)
/>were started to make people have this same belief. Towards the end, those
/>fighting lost sight of that. They turned it into a land gaining, plundering,
/>money making ordeal. So many lives were lost. Those lives could have been
/>saved if people would only learn to understand that this world contains all
/>types. Maybe the people who don't believe in a certain God won't go to
/>Heaven when they die. But it isn't right to go about and force something
/>upon them. They believe in what they want by choice, and if they don't go
/>to Heaven, then they don't go. We go through life and everything we do will
/>catch up with us at the end. But I don't mean to preach here, I am sorry I
/>am way off. I get easily carried away :)
/
/It is entirely debateable whether the Crusades were for God. It is more
/probable that the Crusades were a way for the ruling class to gain economi-
/cally and a way for the soldiers to glorify themselves.
I agree. The invoking of religious (or human-rights, the current favorite)
reasons are often just smokescreens for the business-as-usual actions of the
wealthy set, as they oppress in order to secure and expand their domains.
/The lowest soldiers
/(the ones who actually died) probably believed that they were glorifying
/God,
To me this is part of the overall atrocity of government direction of the
lower classes into warfare ... human death to secure economic positions.
I am not a fan of the lubricating of foreign affairs with human murder.
Neither should those who say they abide by the peaceful maxims of their
religions.
/but I do not believe they were guilty of all the atrocities committed
/there. I do not believe in God, but if God exists, this is only his fault
/in the sense that his name was exploited.
/
/I think you guys are having a wonderful discussion, by the way.
The truth will out.
--
Steven Garman <suga...@world.std.com>
Remove the "X" in my address or your REPLY will BOUNCE back to YOU.
Steven Garman
[newsgroups trimmed to something more sensible]
Sat, 15 Feb 1997, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin) wrote:
/h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk (Hlafen T Heffelberger) wrote:
/>Sat, 15 Feb 1997 17:08:15 GMT, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin) wrote:
/>>I think it is something that we all should fear. The government for
/>>years has tried to invade our peace and freedom. That's evident.
/>
/>You are quite right. It's time for a more liberal government, a
/>government which supports the needs of the people.
I'd be careful with the "liberal" term if I were you. I've seen too many
"liberals" advocate everything under the sun, but especially advocacy of
controlling the individual for the "good of the people". Examine your
"liberals" -- and "liberal" feelings -- carefully.
/>>The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals. They
/>>hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people are
/>>more helpless than educated ones.
The educated ones are just as much at fault in perpetuating the system of
human unfairness and financial power, than the ignorant ones who do not
stop this type of underhanded tyranny.
One of the basics methods used by the government is the skim. A project
is started and funded, just so special interests can get involved and skim
a percentage off of the budget for the project, thus enriching themselves.
Another method used is fear. There used to a be a BIG fear factor with the
USSR. That leveraged quite a bit of money and privileged positions out of
the population. Now that that particular fear factor has waned due to the
obvious failure of the USSR to be a world aggressor, the method requires
another. Fears of the Arabs (i.e. militant and repressive Islamic funda-
mentalism) and South Americans (i.e. drugs) are being raised to replace the
spectacularly effective public fear of the USSR.
Yes, government is a prime example of power hunger, use and abuse. And
the American taxpayer is funding all of that wealth, privilege, and human
oppression and murder.
/>This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we have
/>in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people rule.
/
/I totally agree with you here. People should rule. We should have a
/say so in what happens.
Unless you have money, that is going to be difficult. The system in the
USA is heavily based on the socio-economics of corporations and business in
general. Have you ever read the Declaration of Independence and the Con-
stitution? I have, word for word, and they sound remarkably like business
plans. This makes sense. The aristocracy that led the American Revolution
were people with business interests that opposed the business interests of
Britain's leadership -- primarily on the issue of "who keeps the profits?".
Naturally the founding documents for the "independent" government reflect
those interests. (I say "independent" in quotes because the government
didn't really attain independence from business interests. It attained some
secular and religious independence, but control remained quite firmly in
the hands of the wealthy. The difference was that they were the domestic
wealthy.)
/>>We have aloud ourselves to be treated this way for years, and we never
/>>once tried to stop it. Not really. Part of the problem is laws themselves.
/>>They were meant to be amended, or even taken away. Yet most of them
/>>haven't.
/>
/>I'm not sure that laws were meant to be amended. I thought the intention
/>was to put the law in place for ever?
The basis of the rights outlined in the Constitution is that they are
"natural rights" -- granted by God. The Constitution does not *grant* those
rights -- it merely *recognizes* them. From that you can draw your own con-
clusions about "forever".
/Yes, but take the amendent the right to bare arms. (Amendment 2 or 3
/if I am I right, probably not though). That was for people to protect
/ourselves from ther English during the days after the Revolution.
Not entirely. The natural right to keep and bear arms (as recognized in
Amendment 2) has a broader meaning and purpose. I am sure that the recogni-
tion of that right suited the aristocracy of the American Revolution just
fine, since it was used as a lever against Britain's government. But the
basis of the individual armament is just that -- individual. Governments
that abuse the populace must face that natural right. This therefore
applies in our current society. If the government oppresses, then by
virtue of the natural right to keep and bear arms, the people can resist.
/Now it only creates a problem.
I disagree. I certainly acknowledge that the stereotypical "gangsta" youth
running around with handguns is a problem. The solution however should
NOT be to yank the natural rights from all the citizenry. The problems I
exampled are heavily caused to economics, not freedoms. Thus the solution
should be addressed in that fashion. Those youths are running around and
causing problems becasue they are poor and -- doubly so -- disenfranchised.
Grabbing everyone's guns as a result will not solve that unrest.
... And that grabbing will open up the severe jeopardy of oppression of the
masses. History is too full of examples of the vicious abuse of unarmed
populations by their governments. I know a few police officers, and they
assert that the most dangerous thing they can do is enter an American home.
And that's how it should be.
Switzerland is fine example (barring other social differences) of the
freedom of personal armaments and participative democracy. American does
not have that level of participative democracy. It is therefore no surprise
to me about the popular sentiments against gun ownership and use. If
America would return to the older days of participative democracy, then the
thoughts of individual responsibilities and rights would become popular
again, and so would the natural rights of armaments against oppression.
/I am not totally disagring with you. In
/fact, you are probably more right about all this than I am. What do I
/am know? I am only a fifteen year old female.
Assuming you are not being sarcastic, then you at least show the significant
maturity of knowing the limitations of your knowledge. I also find it of
merit that you are conversing in an attempt to learn. Human language inter-
actions are a crucial part of forming a capable intellect.
/Yet, I still think that
/some of the Consitution should be changed. It served it's purpose long
/ago, but now we no longer need it.
We always need natural rights. What parts of the Constitution do you think
are currently not needed? Do you think that it is wise to change the
Constitution for transient problems?
/>>As for the law purposely letting out crimnals to create total anarchy,
/>>well what are we to do? We have let the government control us for this
/>>long we are basically stuck. They only way for us to stop it is to
/>>revolt. But isn't that exactly what they want? As you said they want
/>>us to create a revolution.
I can see your point. The government in the USA has taken all powers of
violence into itself. It commits and supports terrible acts of violence
across the world, while outlawing any form of dissent on the domestic front.
Look at it this way: one man rapes a women. The woman's brothers seek him
out and hurt or kill him. The government arrests them and tries them for
the assault or murder.
Hopefully the jury would toss that out ... but the government brought the
case in the first place. Why? Because the government is the source of all
violence, justice and dissent. This is in base violation of the individual.
When we turn 18, we no longer should have a legal parent. But the government
continues that role. People are denied individual responsibility therefore.
Take another example. Someone cheats you. You get ahold of them and beat
them up. This is justice at the most basic and essential level. But the
state will try you for assault.
People who annoy other people *by hurting or cheating them*, should be
fearful of the person whom they hurt or cheat. But this mechanism for
justice has been taken over by the state.
So ... to return to the point at hand: Sure the government wants some form
of revolution. It will weed out the people who resist. Once you resist as
an individual, they can kill you or jail you, and thus put a stop to the
revolt. They have subverted the entire concept of justice and have placed
themselves as the source of all justice actions -- which is *most injust*.
/>Yes, the government obviously want us to have a revolution. That gives
/>them the excuse to bring in more laws which is what they want to do.
This is in sync with what I said above. This fits into the fear method,
and leverages the state into more justice actions. Time after time, the
state uses fear and revolts as an excuse to become more repressive. This
increases control and makes it much easier to skim public funds for private
profits -- which was the entire point to the exercise. Since businesses are
the root of the government, they naturally want no disturbance of the status
quo of (1) no dissent, (2) no disruption of business infrastructure and
operations, and (3) no disruption of the consumerism that feeds profits.
"People should all just go to work, do what they are told, pay every tax,
come home, stay home, watch TV, and just basically shut the hell up."
/>This will provoke another revolution and so it goes on. That way there
/>will always be a government.
Funny that you make this observation. Revolutions are interesting things.
They have trends just like any other human endeavor. Generally, you can
have a revolution if you have the following parts:
1) Disenfranchised poor.
2) Hungry poor.
3) Disgruntled faction of the aristocracy.
If you are missing any of these things, you really cannot have a revolt of
any kind. For example, the disgruntled faction of the aristocracy provides
the crucial element of capital funding that can make a revolution run.
/Exactly. That's the sad part of our situation. There really isn't any way
/to over come it. Unless, that is, the government is eventually abolished.
/But how can it be if we the people have no control or power in it?
In the USA, there still is a significant and documented set of freedoms.
The ruling class heavily rely on fooling the public and keeping them quiet.
Thus power still resides in the public, although it is currently a sleeping
giant as far as politics goes. To fight the goverment beast, you can do so
by trying to get at the chink in the armor -- that generally, when faced
with unconstitutionality of their actions in public, the oppressers back
down. Then you have to continue to chase them, since they tend to go under-
ground again.
It has been said that American freedom has driven the American government
underground. You just have to root it out. Either it will wither in public
exposure, or it will take autocratic control and we will all be able to see
the beast of oppression for what it is. In the latter case, the war will
begin in earnest, I'm sorry to say.
/>>But some of the most religious men have been corrupted. Look at the
/>>Crusades. It was unfair and unjust,
/>
/>What was unfair about it?
/
/The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God.
Har! If you keep saying things as sensible as that, then people will label
you a kook. This is espeically true if you take your opinions and naturally
apply them to current religious and secular activities.
I really can't harp against religion that much. As far as human murder goes,
since religions worldwide have *mostly* stopped being governmental author-
ities (which is why I use the term "secular" to describe modern governments),
at least they have stopped being the definitive source of violence. This
does not apply much to the Middle East, however. There are distinct Islamic
forces in those governments (not counting Israel, in which there is a dis-
tinct Jewish force in government).
/God, if
/there is one, wouldn't want us to kill in order to spread his word. In
/the Bible is says to spread the word by example. Yet, the Bible is
/open to many intreptations, so I could be wrong.
As far as the Bible goes, it is not debatable when it says as one of the
Commandments:
Thou shalt not kill.
"Do not kill." With that one short sentence of religious law, no one who
holds the Bible as the words of their god, should kill (or approve of
the killing of) a human being. Those who do kill have broken their own
religious laws. It is things like this that make the European religious
history so bizzare, and makes bumper stickers like "God Bless The Troops"
one of the most inane things I have ever seen.
/I just don't think it
/was right for war ro break out over God. He is there to give us peace
/of mind and to help us when we can't go on. The Crusades (am I
/spelling this correctly?) were started to make people have this same
/belief. Towards the end, those fighting lost sight of that.
Sorry, but as soon as they lifted their swords and daggers and began to
kill, they parted from their religion. Their moral foundation broke from
the very start.
/They turned it into a land gaining, plundering, money making ordeal. So
/many lives were lost. Those lives could have been saved if people
/would only learn to understand that this world contains all types.
/Maybe the people who don't believe in a certain God won't go to Heaven
/when they die. But it isn't right to go about and force something upon
/them. They believe in what they want by choice, and if they don't go
/to Heaven, then they don't go. We go through life and everything we do
/will catch up with us at the end. But I don't mean to preach here, I
/am sorry I am way off. I get easily carried away :)
I don't see you lifting a sword, so it seems that we can trust you. ;^)
/>>Population control is something we should seriously look at. Soon all
/>>the resources in this world will be used up. What will the children of
/>>the future live off of.
/>
/>I disagree. We can always grow more food. I favour sea-farming on a
/>large scale, especially whales. Properly bred, whales would supply
/>more of our needs than beef does at present. We could also breed
/>dolphins in the inland lakes. We won't go hungry if we are a little
/>more creative.
If you are interesting in another sea-farming scheme, then I urge you to
read "The Millenial Project" by Marshall Savage, ISBN 0-316-77163-5. The
book discusses the colonization of space, but he begins an extensive plan
for sea-farming communities, which is most illuminating. He didn't talk
about breeding whales, but his scheme can easily accomodate such a thing.
/True, I never saw it that way. I still think we should watch ourselves
/carefully. But remember, if the water is polluted, none of that can be
/done. I know you were stating an example, and I think you are right. I
/just think we should be more aware, that's all.
This is why I speak out on Usenet. Awareness requires information, not
just inquisitiveness.
/>>I am not saying that the government should enforce population control.
/>>Yes it is an invasion on our privacy. But if we want to ensure the
/>>contrinuance of the human species, we have to watch all of our actions
/>>very carefully, including this one.
/>
/>A lot of people are watching this activity very carefully.
AND WELL THEY SHOULD.
--
Steven Garman <suga...@world.std.com>
Remove the "X" in my address or your REPLY will BOUNCE back to YOU.
"The heart of the American propaganda system is in a constant setting
of discussion agendas away from the effect of corporations upon foreign
affairs, and in the marginalization of views that would bring exposure
to that effect."
Bigfoot
In article <330A50...@ix.netcom.com>, Michael P. Judge says...
>Fuck Elton John, shut the hell up up and take your spam like a man
>I perfer pizza okay?
Spam pizza? Might work.
-Bigfoot
Dch...@jdc.org.il
Test to end spam.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Hiroshima 45, Chernobyl 86, Windows 95
-Per Dahlin
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
The Chocolate Lady (Davida Chazan)
Test to end spam.
Davida Chazan,
~*~*~*~*~*~
Chocolate Gourmet and Expert Omphalopsychite
(often at the same time)!
{Warning: Email address corrupted to avoid spam.}
~*~*~*~*~*~
Dch...@jdc.org.il
you know my number, look up my name
gumby <gu...@pokey.com> wrote:
>John Griffin wrote:
>>
>> In article <5e64jq$n...@nnrp1.news.primenet.com>,
>> Kerry l. Molineux <"avm...@primenet.com"@mailhost.primenet.com> wrote:
>> >Xiu Li wrote:
>>
>> >> It is entirely debateable whether the Crusades were for God. It is
>> >> more probable that the Crusades were a way for the ruling class to gain
>> >> economically and a way for the soldiers to glorify themselves. The
>> >> lowest soldiers (the ones who actually died) probably believed that they
>> >> were glorifying God, but I do not believe they were guilty of all the
>> >> atrocities committed there. I do not believe in God, but if God exists,
>> >> this is only his fault in the sense that his name was exploited.
>>
>> The crusaders were mercenaries. They got to keep part of the loot.
>> The "God" bullshit was just a crutch to carry them through an
>> arduous journey - just as it is today.
>>
>> >> I think you guys are having a wonderful discussion, by the way.
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Xiu Li
>>
>> >Could you be a little more clear on how this relates to the Kinks???
>>
>> Yes. Kink George conceived the idea for two reasons: The aforementioned
>> loot, and he wanted the knights out of town so he could screw their
>> wives.
>>
>> By the way...whoever started this thread was lazy. You left
>> out literally thousands of newsgroups. Maybe it was just an
>> oversight.
>well then why did'nt you trim them, you fucking asshole?
i can see after a lame comeback like that to to such poetic wit that
you are waaaayy out of your league. very, very, very, very, very,
very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very,
very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very
lame. even lamer than writing *very* a bunch of times. my advice if
you want to get in a flame war with john is go read *internet for
dummies* (where did i hear that before?). it gives lots of hints for
kids starting out at making non-lame comebacks. hope this helps.
now say something else lame before you go read that book.
you lose. TILT!!! please try again....
deposit 25¢
Glenn Woiler
Find out what you should know, that the news media will not tell you.
--
~~~~Glenn
http://www.aa.net/~gwoiler/health/health.htm
What their not saying about MAD COW Disease
cha...@jdc.org.il
Test to stop this spam.
John Griffin
In article <5eeds3$2...@camel2.mindspring.com>,
Apparently I underestimated the guy by only noticing his laziness.
Give him a break. He's miffed because I trimmed out 2/3 of his
newsgroups. After his amazingly ignorant comeback, he ought to
thank me for minimizing his exposure to normal people.
The sad thing is that if could have controlled his posting reflex,
no one would have known that he was the insufferable fool who
crossposted to dozens of newsgroups. He's only a little kid, so
I'll leave him alone now.
* -------------------The alt.fan.oj-simpson FAQ--------------------- *
* Q1: Did that lying, wife-beating, thieving scumbag Simpson do it? *
* A: Yes. *
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
Robert J. Stock
Steven Garman wrote:
> Government is too often nothing more than a pack of vicious and
> thieving little liars that are in it to ensure and grow their personal and
> familial estates. Who really needs such a staggering load like that on
> their backs?
So that government of the people, by the few, for the few, shall not
perish from this earth.
Robert J. Stock
Steven Garman wrote:
>
> [newsgroups trimmed to something more sensible]
Always a wize move.
> We always need natural rights. What parts of the Constitution do you think
> are currently not needed? Do you think that it is wise to change the
> Constitution for transient problems?
Any changes should be considered carefully, and approved by the people.
Most transient issues can be handled with legislation.
> /The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God.
>
> Har! If you keep saying things as sensible as that, then people will label
> you a kook. This is espeically true if you take your opinions and naturally
> apply them to current religious and secular activities.
Thinking on your own and challenging official positions is not
encouraged
these days. Sadly, to our own detriment.
...beija-flor...
then suddenly... in newsgroup [uk.misc] <Kennon Baird> writ:-
=> h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk (Hlafen T Heffelberger) wrote:
=>
=> >On Sat, 15 Feb 1997 17:08:15 GMT, grd...@mindspring.com (Kaitlin)
=> >wrote:
=>
=> >>I think it is something that we all should fear. The government for
=> >>years has tried to invade our peace and freedom. That's evident.
=>
=> >You are quite right. It's time for a more liberal government, a
=> >government which supports the needs of the people.
=> Goverment cannot support or supply anyone with anything, because it
=> produces nothing.
Oh yes it does... lots of hot air, claptrap, lies, bullshit, taxes,
incompetence, corruption, dishonesty, disinformation, misinformation,
deceit ...to list but a few things govts produce. <g>
(snip)
_________________________________________________________________________
In 1954, 16% of Americans believed Big Government was the greatest threat
to their freedoms...in 1994 it was 67%
Jim Schneider
HEY!!!!!!!
Look, folks, if you think something is posted inappropriately to a
newsgroup, please send a MAIL message to the poster. Don't reply to the
posting. Your reply gets sent to every newsgroup that the original went
to. And that just chews up bandwidth.
The Chocolate Lady (Davida Chazan)
On Tue, 18 Feb 1997 15:27:56 -0800 during the alt.food.chocolate
Community News Flash:
Please stop cross posting these messages to inappropriate groups.
Thank you.
Kiss My Ass!!!
YOU are the DICKHEAD!
gumby <gu...@pokey.com> wrote in article <330A36...@pokey.com>...
> Kaitlin wrote:
> >
> > "Robert J. Stock" <rjs...@dawg.delcoelect.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Kaitlin wrote:
> > >>
> > >> h...@ohitmous.demon.co.uk (Hlafen T Heffelberger) wrote:
> > >> >>The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals.
They
> > >> >>hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people
are
> > >> >>more helpless than educated ones.
> > >> >
> > >> >This is always the case with the rabid right-wing governments we
have
> > >> >in the West at present. The answer is Socialism. Let the people
rule.
> > >> I totally agree with you here. People should rule. We should have a
> > >> say so in what happens.
> > >
> > >Yes, but do we need socialism to do this?
> > >
> > >> Yes, but take the amendent the right to bare arms. (Amendment 2 or 3
> > >> if I am I right, probably not though). That was for people to
protect
> > >> ourselves from ther English during the days after the Revolution.
Now
> > >> it only creates a problem. I am not totally disagring with you. In
> > >> fact, you are probably more right about all this than I am. What do
I
> > >> am know? I am only a fifteen year old female. Yet, I still think
that
> > >> some of the Consitution should be changed. It served it's purpose
long
> > >> ago, but now we no longer need it.
> > >
> > >The second amendment:
> > >
> > >1) for self protection
> > >
> > >2) for hunting
> > >
> > >3) for making sure that the government remains sensitive to the needs
of
> > >the people.
> > >
> > >I think the second amendment should stay as these are still vital.
> > >
> > >On a general note, yes, the constitution does need a major overhaul.
> > >
> > >> >>But some of the most religious men have been corrupted. Look at
the
> > >> >>Crusades. It was unfair and unjust,
> > >> >
> > >> >What was unfair about it?
> > >> >
> > >> The unfait part was all these people died in the name of God. God,
if
> > >
> > ><snip>
> > >
> > >> am sorry I am way off. I get easily carried away :)
> > >
> > >Bigger fish getting smaller fish killed off. Both government
> > >and religion are used to control people.
> > >
> > >You sound pretty thoughtful for your age. You would also be surprised
> > >at
> > >how much more you might know than 36 year old men.
> > Thank you :) Sorry everyone, I didn't mean to go off on a lecture of
> > sorts. I have a habit of it. Anyways, I must say I learned alot from
> > all this, even if I did cause alot fo trouble. But that is what I am
> > good for *grin* Thanks for putting up with me! :)
>
>
> Fuck you asshole! Quit posting in newsgroups that aren't dedicated
> to your favorite topics, fuckface, we don't take well to spammers,
> DICKHEAD
>
>
Pedro Sena
> > >> >>The government is a prime example of power hungry individuals.
They
> > >> >>hide things from us to "protect" us, but in truth ignorant people
are
> > >> >>more helpless than educated ones.
What else is new... slavery is alive and well in another form... the poor
still serve the rich by paying money in taxes and tarifs. But if anyone
really wants to do something about it, just vote the fuckers out of office,
and replace them with someone that will change it to our way.... for
christ's sake, you are in America, and YOU HAVE A CHANCE to do this... 90%
of the whole world can not do this, and on top of it, DOES NOT even have a
voice for it.
Bitching about it is a waste... pure waste of time, and in this case,
bandwidth.
glynn bradley
In article <01bc2092$e08f6820$9df689ce@athena>, Kiss My Ass!!!
<kiss...@uranus.com> writes
the momment and do not have the time to answer extra newgropups.
--
Credit Unions are here to stay.
Make sure you join today.
The Chocolate Lady (Davida Chazan)
Please stop cross-posting from this thread to inappropriate groups.
Many thanks.
Alana Jordan
No one EVER stays on topic on USENET. Haven't you figured that out
yet?
Alana Jordan al...@crl.com
Alana's Online Ads (Free Classified Ads) http://www.crl.com/~alana
Free Advertising Dealership http://www.crl.com/~alana/freedeal.html
Discount Print Advertising http://www.crl.com/~alana/deep.html
MLM Leads http://www.crl.com/~alana/mlmleads.html
glynn bradley
In article <5fbuj7$c...@nexp.crl.com>, Alana Jordan <al...@crl.com>
writes
--
glynn bradley