From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Sep 16 8:24: 7 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 561E837B406 for ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 08:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFF11BCE2; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 08:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA06841; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 08:24:04 -0700 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f8GFNiv45629; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 08:23:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: "Stephen Hurd" Cc: , Subject: Re: choosing the perfect windowmanager? References: From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 16 Sep 2001 08:23:43 -0700 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Lines: 17 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Stephen Hurd" writes: > Basically, I like running blackbox all by itself with no desktop environment > at all. That aside, I've always preferred KDE 1.x as a desktop environment > for one simple reason... the taskbar at the top... they've killed it in 2.x > and I still haven't forgiven them. I seem to be the only person in the world > that feels that way though. :-) IIRC, I read several months ago that the Task Bar was back, or more likely, available as an add-on. BTW, I like to keep the full vertical space of my monitor available to XEmacs to maximize lines of text, and find fvwm2's FvwmWinList is a good kind of task bark over on the right edge below a three-pane FvwmButtons (with clock,date,xload,xosview(with 4 subpanes without labels, etc)). I've a small monitor so squeeze it all (and 4-page screen pager) into right one-inch. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Sep 16 11: 0:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2980F37B408; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 11:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA17653; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 11:59:46 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010916115841.0467c100@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 11:59:25 -0600 To: "Daniel O'Connor" , Paul Robinson From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Laptops & FreeBSD Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, KEPA In-Reply-To: References: <20010915194031.K3356@jake.akitanet.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 08:25 PM 9/15/2001, Daniel O'Connor wrote: >Unless they're Lucent WinModems, or IBM MWave's... I tried to get an MWave working and did not succeed. Has someone managed to do it? --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Sep 16 12:52:41 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from cecov.masternet.it (cecov.masternet.it [194.184.65.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0E2F37B409 for ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 12:52:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usul.scotty.masternet.it (modem00.masternet.it [194.184.65.195]) by cecov.masternet.it (8.11.6/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f8GJsno02505; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 21:54:49 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from gmarco@scotty.masternet.it) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010916214834.01b423e0@194.184.65.7> X-Sender: gmarco@194.184.65.7 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 21:52:46 +0200 To: KEPA , chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: Gianmarco Giovannelli Subject: Re: Laptops & FreeBSD In-Reply-To: <0109151923360C.01165@eu148-227.clientes.euskaltel.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 15/09/2001, KEPA wrote: >I'm thinking on buying a laptop. >I know clone laptops origine installation problems with Linux ordinary. >Dell. IBM and Sony are recomended. >Is it the same in FreeBSD? My Toshiba (portege) works quite well, Dell is one of the preferred by FreeBSD developers, as I have seen :-) I think you can check: http://www.cse.ucsc.edu/~dkulp/fbsd/laptop.html Btw I have installed FreeBSD without any problems also on a clone laptop. And I was very happy of this. :-) Best Regards, Gianmarco Giovannelli , "Unix expert since yesterday" http://www.giovannelli.it/~gmarco http://www2.masternet.it To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Sep 16 14:42: 2 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812A337B40C for ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 14:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.245.132.139.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.132.139]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f8GLfWD16709; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 14:41:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3BA51CBA.BB366813@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 14:42:18 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Piet Delport Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Stephen Hurd , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <3BA33CB6.FE0102C8@mindspring.com> <20010916024154.B57021@athalon> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Piet Delport wrote: > > I'm certain that, had the Germans pointed out a more direct route to > > defeating them, including precisely the targets to concentrate on in > > order to make them lose, the Allies would have been very happy to undo > > the one bolt that held everything together, instead of maniacally > > blasting away with a shotgun. > > So, to paraphrase, it was Germany's fault that the Allies carpet-bombed > their cities, because Germany didn't conveniently point out to their > enemies where all their most important military targets are instead? No. It was their fault for starting a war: no matter who wins, casualties are always the fault of who started it. For example, in the action against Manuel Noreiga, the U.S. was at fault for starting the violence -- Noreiga goaded them into it, but the violence was initiated by the U.S.. The carpet bombings of Germany in Word War II were the result of starting the war PLUS the lack of data on hard targets. Likewise the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the fault of the aggressor nation. > Expecting the country you're at war with to conveniently reveal all > their key military weak spots to you is absurd, and taking the fact that > they (obviously) didn't do so and using it as a moral excuse to carpet > bomb their cities and civilians is just as absurd. The intent was to bomb everything, and hope you destroyed military targets and leadership. The intent to destroy military leadership makes the Pentagon a military target, as well, but, again, the U.S. was not the aggressor nation. > The fact is that thousands of civilians died in those bombings, and > while war in general is a Bad Thing, i think the mass-killing of > civilians like that is one of the worst examples of it. Collateral damage is always a bad thing. Prior to the advent of guerilla warfare, soldiers marhed in straight lines and took turns firing arrows at each other, after which they rushed at each other with hand weapons. Civilian targets were generally spared any collateral damage at all. If you are an agressor nation, and you use your own civilians as "chaff" to hide your military targets, then it is _you_ who are attacking your population, by proxy, not the nation whom you attacked. > Whether it's the Allies, the Germans, or even Bin Laden's terrorists > that do the said killing doesn't make it any less wrong. I never said it wasn't wrong. [ ... nuclear fear is driven by collective remorse ... ] > These are indeed many excellent examples of how Americans want to get > rid of nuclear power plants, despite their superiority in every way over > older technologies. > > However, i sincerely doubt that they has anything whatsoever to do with > guilt over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. More likely is that this is because > a large number of Americans (statistically speaking) perceive nuclear > power as dangerous to *themselves* (cue cancer scares, and public > paranoia of reactors melting down a la Chernobyl). [1] [ ... First let's point out that what the U.S. generally feels is "remorse", _not_ "guilt". ... ] That's actually not correct. The Japanese have a cultural phobia regarding cancer; even prior to the bombings, their cancer rates are significantly higher, generally due to the contents of their telomers (i.e. a genetic predisposition). In the U.S., the public is confident that medical science can cure anything. In fact, we are so confident of this, that we sue doctors, nurses, and hospitals when they fail to cure a fatal injury or disease, on the theory that the reason for the failure was not the injury or disease was beyond current capability to cure, but instead, the result of the medical community failing to "try hard enough". To add to the lack of fear of cancer thesis: in California, a fuel additive, MTBE, is used, even though it is known to be highly carcinogenic. It is a trade, consciously made, in order to "protect the environment". The ignorance here is that any car manufactured since the late 1980's has an Oxygen sensor, and these cars actually pollute _more_ when Oxygenated fuels are used. In any case, until recently, where it was proven that more environmental damage results from MTBE in the waterways, Californians were happily accepting the cancer risk on the theory that, if they got it, it could be cured, but damage to the environment has always been portrayed as "forever". I don't think the U.S. fears Chernobyl; for one thing, there was significant public spin-doctoring at the time, and for another, there was significant dissemination of real information on reactor designs, indicating that a Chernobyl-style accident could not occur here, because U.S. reactor technology precludes that -- Three Mile Island was cited as supporting evidence, as the reactor containment vessels did _exactly_ what they were designed to do, and _contained_ the accident. The thing that upset people, by the way, was the use of the alarming word "accident". Finally, the most compelling reason that the U.S. doesn't fear a Chernobyl type accident is the same that it does not fear a Bhopal type accident: the U.S. was not down wind. > Even besides that, what do electricity-generating nuclear _power plants_ > (which Americans are opposed to) have to do with nuclear _weapons_ > (which you hardly even mention) in this context? Regular nuclear power plants do not produce enriched Uranium or Plutonium, and so only breeder reactors are required in order to produce weapons fuels (I thought general knowledge of nuclear technology was better than it is, apparently). This is why I made the comment on the disparity between the number of breeder and classical nuclear reactors: the U.S. population is generally aware enough of that, and guilty enough over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that they forego the use of breeders to prevent themselves from making a ready supply of nuclear weapons fuel which could be stolen and incorporated into weapons (it is common that U.S. high school students can design such weapons these days; hydrogen bombs aren't much harder). > If Americans are so soul-struck with guilt over their bombing of Japan, > why isn't there an outcry over the fact that even more nuclear weapons > are being manufactured? Apparently, you have never visited the gates outside the Brookhaven facility, where the protest has become a vigil. > Why aren't they trying to get rid of the *bombs*, instead of civilian > reactors? They are. Or they were, prior to this incident. I rather suspect that the incident has convinced many, close to the decision line, that it's just as well we have the weapons, and it's just as well we have the capability of manufacturing more. FYI: The current manufacturing rate is only to keep up with the half life of existing components, which must be changed out every so often to keep the weapons active. The U.S. is reducing the total number of its weapons, not stockpiling more. The U.S. is conforming to the terms of its treaties. > > So you are an idiot if you don't think that America does not suffer > > _profound_ guilt over the use of nuclear weapons in the Japan > > conflict; it does -- to the point of abandoning money, working lights > > and heat, efficiency, and rabid environmentalism... all to assuage > > that guilt. > > Guilt over the past use of nuclear weapons and irrational fear of > civilian nuclear reactors are two entirely separate things. I doubt > *anyone* paying that fee to support the de-commissioning of existing > reactors are thinking about Hiroshima/Nagasaki when they do so. I am. I would just as well not pay the fee, or change it to a fee to build _more_ reactors, rather than decomissioning old ones -- I, for one, _am_ concerned about the pollution caused by fossil-fuel burning plants. The majority of power plants in California burn natural gas, a fossil fuel, imported mostly from Texas, at userous rates. The new plants being brought on line over the "power emergency" (what a joke: that's not worthy of the name "emergency") are generally natural gas burning as well. > Instead, are there any public memorials dedicated to the tragedy, any > public days of mourning, or anything like that which would indicate real > guilt? (This is an honest question, i really haven't the faintest > idea.) Yes. One was recently dedicated in San Francisco, on the anniversary of the bombing. I guess the U.S. public does have a short attention span. > > PS: How profound do you think is the guilt of the perpetrators of the > > September 11th atrocity?. > > Even less than the guilt of Joe Average American over America's own > atrocities, i imagine. Any attrocity is justifiable in self defense, when the alternative is your own destruction. In any case, I will not act as an appologist for everything which you choose to label "attrocity", any more than I would expect you, as a South African, to justify Apartheid. To bring this down to earth, consider the case of a person breaking into your bedroom with a deadly weapon. You have the means to kill them, and they have the means to kill you. They do not leave as a result of this, but press the issue, and you have no means of leaving, either: it is now either you or them. I would argue that you are now put in the position in deciding which of two human beings merits continued existance, and that by acting, you decide in favor of you, and by not acting, you decide in favor of the invader. To compound the issue, you believe it is wrong to kill; but you bear responsibility for the death, either way, as it is your decision to make. Would a "human being" put someone in the position where they are forced to make such a choice? I would argue that the answer is "no" -- and therefore, the invarder has less of a right to their continued existance than you do. So really the only thing you have to decide is whether to act by commission or by omission, with the knowledge that acting by omission will endanger other people in the future (perhaps your wife, children, or total strangers in the next home this person invades). I think it is important to protect the lives of human beings, but I also thingk it is possible to forfeit one's status _as_ a human being. I think the terrorists in this case have forfeited their status as human beings. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Sep 16 16:36: 6 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78B1737B406 for ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 16:36:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.245.132.139.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.132.139]) by harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA23223; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 16:35:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3BA5377C.7744869A@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 16:36:28 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Piet Delport , Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Stephen Hurd , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <3BA33CB6.FE0102C8@mindspring.com> <20010916024154.B57021@athalon> <3BA51CBA.BB366813@mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert wrote: > > > PS: How profound do you think is the guilt of the perpetrators of the > > > September 11th atrocity?. > > > > Even less than the guilt of Joe Average American over America's own > > atrocities, i imagine. > > Any attrocity is justifiable in self defense, when the alternative > is your own destruction. To elaborate on this one point: Recently, I was at a meeting where it was suggested by one vocal person that the U.S. had no business backing Israel, and that this event was the just deserts of the U.S. not stepping aside, and allowing Arab nations (presumably, Syria), to militarily assault and hold the West Bank. The person went on to state that Israel had no business displacing the people of the West Bank from their homes, to build housing for Israeli immigration from other countries. I pointed out that Israel won that land in a defensive action as the spoils of war, and that the Geneva Convention recognizes the spoils of war as being legitimate. Further, I stated, the non-Israeli people living on the West Bank do so at Israel's sufferage, and that most nations would have forced them to leave at the time the land was won, following occupation and the end of the war. I further pointed out that Israel was created as a reparation for crimes against them in World War II, and that the attacks on Israel which resulted in that war were illegitimate and illegal, in the eyes of the world. He ignored (or rather, was infuriated by, but held himself in check) these points, and stated that it was only the U.S. military might that prevented the land from being seized by "its rightful owners". I pointed out that Israel had nuclear weapons. He stated that Israel would _never_ use such weapons, as they themselves would be down wind, and would destroy themselves. I pointed out that Israel probably had a sufficient blood supply, bone marrow depository, and stockpiles of Calcium EDTA and powdered eggs, that they would probably be willing to use the weapons, if it came down to them feeling their existance was threatened, and accept the losses, knowing that while they may be terrible, they will not be total, and the alternative would be to accept total annihilation. One side is fighting for land and political and religious reasosn; the other side has those same reasons, but is also fighting for survival. He was flabbergasted, and thought that I was insane -- How, he asked, could they do that, even in defense of their own existance? I was flabbergasted in return... how could they not?, I asked. If the U.S. or Russia were in the same position, they would do it; that was the entire basis of the cold war: mutually assured destruction: if I die, I am taking you with me. It kept the peace for decades, knowing that if war started, destruction was assured to both combatants. The conversation ended there (thankfully). I left him thinking about how what was unthinkable to him was not only thinkable, but unavoidable, for another. -- I guess bad people can't understand how good people can be put into a position where they have no choice but to do evil, and therefore, they can act with impunity outside "the rules", as the good people will stick within "the rules", and they will be safe from retribution. This is not true of good people; they will feel guilty about doing it at the time, and remorseful afterward, but they will act -- since to not act is also to act. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Sep 16 20:33:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.the-i-pa.com (mail.the-i-pa.com [151.201.71.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ECEDE37B401 for ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 20:33:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 32745 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2001 03:44:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO proxy.the-i-pa.com) (151.201.71.210) by mail.the-i-pa.com with SMTP; 17 Sep 2001 03:44:05 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Bill Moran Organization: Potential Technology To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 23:36:42 -0400 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG References: <01091417452001.15691@sqltest> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01091623364200.12342@proxy.the-i-pa.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Friday 14 September 2001 18:05, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Bill Moran writes: > > Apparently this Ladden guy was a top official in the Saudi government not > > that long ago. Unfortunately, the Saudi government had to kick him out > > because Saudi Arabia (as a whole) was pursuing a more peaceful stance > > with the rest of the world, and Ladden just wouldn't play along. Now > > he's a refugee training terrorists, whereas he was controlling armies not > > that long ago. > > Bollocks. You need to check your facts more carefully. Gee. It's nice how you snip out the part where I admit that my facts might be wrong, just before you berate me. > Firstly, his > name is Usama bin Laden, not "this Ladden guy"; There's an ancient tradition - I don't remember where it originated, but it goes something like this: If you dislike someone or don't respect them, you intentionally forget their name as a way of showing that. Sorry if I wasn't clear about what's-his-name. Does the previous sentence clear it up? As far as the rest of your statement, it's very likely that my earlier sources were false. I admitted that when I wrote the original message. I now have two stories, both of which are hearsay. However, neither one of them refutes my theory, which you had nothing to say about. Thanks for the information. -- Bill Moran Potential Technology technical services (412) 793-4257 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Sep 16 23:46:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE08637B401 for ; Sun, 16 Sep 2001 23:46:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA25407; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 00:46:05 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010917003434.046f6490@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 00:45:39 -0600 To: Giorgos Keramidas , Jason Anthony Mifsud From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: ipfw and ipf and pf Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20010915140313.A45993@hades.hell.gr> References: <20010914232949.A45136@FATE> <20010914232949.A45136@FATE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 05:03 AM 9/15/2001, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >You seem to be prejudiced on this matter. >Why are you saying that ipf or pf[1] is more robust? Many people think so. This may be because, for a long time, ipfw did not have stateful packet examination -- and the statefulness it now incorporates isn't as flexible as ipf's. Also, the mechanism it uses for NAT -- "divert sockets" -- seems to send every packet on a trip through userland. This can be inefficient under high loads. As for pf: it's very much like ipf in terms of rule syntax but is in a different place in the pipeline architecturally. >Both ipf and ipfw can be a descent firewall. They have similar features, and >what can be done in one of them, is also possible with the other for more or >Less all their features. There is on thing that I know ipfw does, which ipf >cannot handle, and that it 'pipes'; a means of bandwidth-limiting. True. However, to be fair, the other BSDs do provide different facilities for bandwidth limiting. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 2:21:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mailsrv.otenet.gr (mailsrv.otenet.gr [195.170.0.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FF6A37B401 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 02:21:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hades.hell.gr (patr530-b026.otenet.gr [195.167.121.154]) by mailsrv.otenet.gr (8.11.5/8.11.5) with ESMTP id f8H9LQd23561; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 12:21:27 +0300 (EEST) Received: (from charon@localhost) by hades.hell.gr (8.11.6/8.11.6) id f8H8eO706526; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 11:40:24 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from charon@labs.gr) Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 11:40:23 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Brett Glass Cc: Jason Anthony Mifsud , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ipfw and ipf and pf Message-ID: <20010917114023.C5577@hades.hell.gr> References: <20010914232949.A45136@FATE> <20010914232949.A45136@FATE> <20010915140313.A45993@hades.hell.gr> <4.3.2.7.2.20010917003434.046f6490@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010917003434.046f6490@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 12:45:39AM -0600 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3A 75 52 EB F1 58 56 0D - C5 B8 21 B6 1B 5E 4A C2 X-URL: http://students.ceid.upatras.gr/~keramida/index.html Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass wrote: > At 05:03 AM 9/15/2001, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > >Both ipf and ipfw can be a descent firewall. They have similar features, and > >what can be done in one of them, is also possible with the other for more or > >Less all their features. There is on thing that I know ipfw does, which ipf > >cannot handle, and that it 'pipes'; a means of bandwidth-limiting. > > True. However, to be fair, the other BSDs do provide different > facilities for bandwidth limiting. I didn't know that, having played very little with other BSDs. Thanks, Brett :) -giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 3:27:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5494037B409 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 03:27:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA46180; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 12:27:06 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: Bill Moran Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <01091417452001.15691@sqltest> <01091623364200.12342@proxy.the-i-pa.com> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 17 Sep 2001 12:27:05 +0200 In-Reply-To: <01091623364200.12342@proxy.the-i-pa.com> Message-ID: Lines: 15 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Bill Moran writes: > As far as the rest of your statement, it's very likely that my > earlier sources were false. I admitted that when I wrote the > original message. I now have two stories, both of which are > hearsay. Mine is based on publically available information which you can easily confirm by doing, say, a Google search on "Usama bin Laden" and browsing the top ten or twenty hits. I know of at least one branch of the US government that has a "fact sheet" about bin Laden on the web; it should show up on Google. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 4:58:55 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-94-248-46.mmcable.com [24.94.248.46]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3DA8E37B407 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 04:58:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 52991 invoked by uid 100); 17 Sep 2001 11:58:45 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15269.58741.184363.281345@guru.mired.org> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 06:58:45 -0500 To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010914140905.056f4340@localhost> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010914140905.056f4340@localhost> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass types: > At 01:24 PM 9/14/2001, Mike Meyer wrote: > >But as you kept on shouting out your hatred > It is you, Mike, who are shouting out hatred. I am condemning it. You are practicing what you are condemning. > >I will agree that mine was a nasty, vindictive attack. > Then stop. As expected, you don't recognize your own vindictive attack as such. If you never make another nasty, vindictive attack, then I won't attack you. It's that simple. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 5:13:10 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-94-248-46.mmcable.com [24.94.248.46]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 223AA37B410 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 05:13:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 53494 invoked by uid 100); 17 Sep 2001 12:13:03 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15269.59599.721255.236673@guru.mired.org> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 07:13:03 -0500 To: tlambert2@mindspring.com Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? In-Reply-To: <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert types: > I changed the subject to reflect this thread, since it's really > stupid in the context in which it's been placed. Thank you. > Mike Meyer wrote in response to Brett Glass: > > I will agree that mine was a nasty, vindictive attack. On the other > > hand, what you do not see is that your attack on RMS was at least as > > nasty and vindictive. They are, essentially, the same attack - > > comparing someone to a lunatic with no regard for human life. > Actually, I think that usually, Brett is mostly attacking RMS' > philosophy; RMS is merely a convenient example of someone who > espouses that philosophy. If Brett stuck to attacking the FSF, the GPL and the philosphy behind them, he'd be doing his cause a great favor. While I consider many of his arguments *wrong*, they are arguments based on reason, and will sway people. However, when he stoops to something like this: > From: Brett Glass > Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> > Stallman, like the Islamic fundamentalists who did this terrible > thing, promotes an extremist ideology which demonizes others, seeks > to destroy them, and is motivated by spite and malice. He comes off as - well, his description of Stallman accurately describe the way he appears when he starts attacking RMS. Unfortunately, anyone who tries to point this out to him he instantly labeled as a "dune coon" - uh, sorry, make that - "fanatic RMS sympathizer" without regard to anything that person has actually said about RMS, the GPL or the FSF. > In short, RMS is a scar, a shaved head, a monocle, and a bald > cat away from being a villian in an Austin Powers movie... I think that would require a major upgrade in his personal hygiene and empathy, though it's been long enough since I've seen him that that might have changed. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 10:36:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from server01.minions.com (server01.minions.com [64.71.168.162]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6536137B409 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 10:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kizmiaz.dis.org (almus@kizmiaz.dis.org [216.240.45.60]) by server01.minions.com (8.11.6/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f8HHaS746937; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 10:36:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from almus@dis.org) Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 10:34:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Almus To: KEPA Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Laptops & FreeBSD In-Reply-To: <0109151923360C.01165@eu148-227.clientes.euskaltel.es> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I'm running a Dell Latitude LS400 and (with a little tweaking) I have freeBSD working great.. including X, sound, pccard, and USB.. great little box.. even better with a real OS on it.. -Almus -- e-mail: almus@dis.org -- Web: http://www.satindeath.net Remember... Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt. Dance like nobody is watching. -- Send private encrypted e-mail - Freedom 1.1 www.zks.net/clickthrough/click.asp?partner_id=111 On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, KEPA wrote: > I'm thinking on buying a laptop. > I know clone laptops origine installation problems with Linux ordinary. > Dell. IBM and Sony are recomended. > Is it the same in FreeBSD? > > Thanks > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 21:50:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6714237B405 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 21:50:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from brett@localhost) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA11999 for chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:50:14 -0600 (MDT) Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:50:14 -0600 (MDT) From: Brett Glass Message-Id: <200109180450.WAA11999@lariat.org> To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Story of the walled-in server? Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I recall, some time ago, hearing a story about a BSD server that was walled in during a renovation and kept on running for years -- until a puzzled IT staff broke through the drywall and found it purring happily away. Does anyone know if this story is true or apocryphal? Any pointers would be appreciated. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 22:18:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5915737B408 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:18:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA12365; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:18:25 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010917231622.049a6100@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:18:21 -0600 To: Mike Meyer , chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror In-Reply-To: <15269.58741.184363.281345@guru.mired.org> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010914140905.056f4340@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010914140905.056f4340@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 05:58 AM 9/17/2001, Mike Meyer wrote: >If you never make another nasty, vindictive attack, then I won't >attack you. My statements were not a "nasty, vindictive attack" but rather appropriate and accurate. In any event, I'm sure that you'll attack me whenever you find an opportunity, just as you have in the past. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 22:57:12 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-94-248-46.mmcable.com [24.94.248.46]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9EB6937B420 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:57:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 87637 invoked by uid 100); 18 Sep 2001 05:57:05 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15270.57905.696405.270470@guru.mired.org> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:57:05 -0500 To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010917231622.049a6100@localhost> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010914140905.056f4340@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010917231622.049a6100@localhost> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass types: > At 05:58 AM 9/17/2001, Mike Meyer wrote: > >If you never make another nasty, vindictive attack, then I won't > >attack you. > My statements were not a "nasty, vindictive attack" but rather > appropriate and accurate. In that case, what I said about you was also "appropriate and accurate." > In any event, I'm sure that you'll attack me whenever you find an > opportunity, just as you have in the past. Dead wrong, as mostly I just ignore you. I just feel a need to point it out when you turn nasty and vindictive. Unfortunately, you can't seem to ignore any opportunity to do so. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Q: How do you make the gods laugh? A: Tell them your plans. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 23:11:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from freenix.no (atreides.freenix.no [217.68.117.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F109637B40A for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:11:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from morten@localhost) by freenix.no (8.11.6/8.11.1) id f8I6B1344339; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 08:11:01 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from morten) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 08:11:01 +0200 From: "Morten A . Middelthon" To: Brett Glass Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Story of the walled-in server? Message-ID: <20010918081101.B43997@freenix.no> References: <200109180450.WAA11999@lariat.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200109180450.WAA11999@lariat.org>; from brett@lariat.org on Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 10:50:14PM -0600 X-PGP-Key: http://freenix.no/~morten/pgp.txt X-PGP-Key-FingerPrint: 20 40 7A 47 1E A0 BF CF 61 BB CD 9D B3 AD CF E2 D4 90 C3 8D X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.3-STABLE X-Warning: So cunning you could brush your teeth with it. Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 10:50:14PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: > I recall, some time ago, hearing a story about a BSD server that was > walled in during a renovation and kept on running for years -- until > a puzzled IT staff broke through the drywall and found it purring > happily away. Does anyone know if this story is true or apocryphal? > Any pointers would be appreciated. Dunno, but I heard a very(!) similar story about a Novell Netware server :) -- Morten A. Middelthon Freenix Norge http://www.freenix.no/ -- Tell me what you need, and I'll tell you how to get along without it. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 23:12:49 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB84837B40E for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:12:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.245.141.224.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.141.224]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f8I6CgI13506; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:12:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3BA6E609.FF37F7A8@mindspring.com> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:13:29 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Glass Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Story of the walled-in server? References: <200109180450.WAA11999@lariat.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass wrote: > > I recall, some time ago, hearing a story about a BSD server that was > walled in during a renovation and kept on running for years -- until > a puzzled IT staff broke through the drywall and found it purring > happily away. Does anyone know if this story is true or apocryphal? > Any pointers would be appreciated. Contact John Sokol. It was a VAX he admin'ed, at one time in his dark past. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 23:30:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 943D537B412 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:30:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA13179; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:30:17 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010918002829.045b6990@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:30:09 -0600 To: Mike Meyer , chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror In-Reply-To: <15270.57905.696405.270470@guru.mired.org> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010917231622.049a6100@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010914140905.056f4340@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010917231622.049a6100@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 11:57 PM 9/17/2001, Mike Meyer wrote: >In that case, what I said about you was also "appropriate and >accurate." Non sequitur. In any event, this thread is getting old and is becoming quite annoying to third parties. Much as I hate to do it to anyone, I'm blackholing you so that I won't be tempted to respond to your nasty remarks. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Sep 17 23:45: 3 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-94-248-46.mmcable.com [24.94.248.46]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E0E8C37B408 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 23:44:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 89188 invoked by uid 100); 18 Sep 2001 06:44:53 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15270.60773.698615.370834@guru.mired.org> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 01:44:53 -0500 To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010918002829.045b6990@localhost> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010917231622.049a6100@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010914140905.056f4340@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918002829.045b6990@localhost> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass types: > At 11:57 PM 9/17/2001, Mike Meyer wrote: > >In that case, what I said about you was also "appropriate and > >accurate." > Non sequitur. Nope. Exactly the point. The two remarks are nearly identical, and anyone applying a consistent standard will see that. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Q: How do you make the gods laugh? A: Tell them your plans. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 0:22:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from nwcst330.netaddress.usa.net (nwcst330.netaddress.usa.net [204.68.23.75]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ED7F537B409 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:22:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 23015 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Sep 2001 07:22:11 -0000 Message-ID: <20010918072211.23014.qmail@nwcst330.netaddress.usa.net> Received: from 204.68.23.75 by nwcst330 for [165.212.15.106] via web-mailer(34FM.0700.21.01) on Tue Sep 18 07:22:11 GMT 2001 Date: 18 Sep 2001 01:22:11 MDT From: J S To: advocacy@freebsd.org, chat@freebsd.org Subject: ot - petition regarding last weeks attacks X-Mailer: USANET web-mailer (34FM.0700.21.01) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org i apologize for posting to multiple lists and that this is off = topic, but i felt that this should be spread to as many people as possible. what ever your feelings are regarding this, i am not out to insult or infuriate anyone, i am only asking for caution. my heart goes out to all that were affected by last week's tragedy. thanks joshua ------------------------------------------------------------------ Please sign The Petition at http://home.uchicago.edu/~dhpicker/petition which appeals to world leaders to be level-headed and, wherever possible, peaceful in their response to the recent attack against the United States. PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. The signatures logged by the website above will be forwarded to leaders around the world. It is imperative that we act quickly to prevent war!!! Thank you. Joshua Smith, CCNA Data Center Technian USA.NET "Walk with me through the Universe, And along the way see how all of us are Connected. Feast the eyes of your Soul, On the Love that abounds. In all places at once, seemingly endless, Like your own existence." - Stephen Hawking - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 0:39:23 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from wiebel.dommel.com (wiebel.dommel.com [64.37.114.98]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E54F037B40E for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:39:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 5854 invoked by uid 508); 18 Sep 2001 07:39:19 -0000 Message-ID: <20010918073919.5853.qmail@wiebel.dommel.com> References: <200109180450.WAA11999@lariat.org> In-Reply-To: <200109180450.WAA11999@lariat.org> From: "Kristof Rutten" To: Brett Glass Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Story of the walled-in server? Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 07:39:19 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass writes: > I recall, some time ago, hearing a story about a BSD server that was > walled in during a renovation and kept on running for years -- http://www.informationweek.com/832/frontend.htm Server Missing No More The University of North Carolina recently had trouble locating a Net-Ware server at one of its academic departments. The school's IT staffers followed cables until hitting on one they thought would lead to the elusive server. Sure enough, say UNC officials, they found it, still operating, alone in a small enclosure. The officials say it had been mistakenly walled in by drywall built by maintenance workers. Curious IT workers dug into records and it appears the server had been in solitary for at least three years .K To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 1:24:13 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-94-248-46.mmcable.com [24.94.248.46]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 475BE37B412 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 01:24:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 93167 invoked by uid 100); 18 Sep 2001 08:24:09 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15271.1192.870999.477376@guru.mired.org> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 03:24:08 -0500 To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: DMCA, the sequel X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I finally sat down and read the text of the SSSCA - the "Security Systems Standards and Certifications Act." . This bill takes the next logical step after the DMCA making it illegal to tamper with copyright protection technology, by making it illegal to give people tools that don't include that technology. Specifically, the act makes it: unlawful to manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies Definitions: The term "certified security technology" means a security technology certified by the Secretary of Commerce. The term "interactive digital device" means any machine, device, product, software, or technology, [...] that is designed, marketed or used for the primary purpose of, and that is capable of, storing, retrieving, processing, performing, transmitting, receiving, or copying information in digital form. Oh yeah, the technology must be "available for licensing on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms." Since FreeBSD is an "interactive digital device" by this definition, that would make it illegal to either offer FreeBSD on a web site in the US, or import it into the US from a web site outisde the US unless it includes that security technology. Given recent history, I wouldn't be comfortable visiting the US if I ran a site outside the use that had made FreeBSD available. The question then becomes - what's the technology going to be? The leading candidate for general computing seems to be TCPA . No licensing information yet. Someone on the TrustedBSD project may want to see about joining. For storage, expect CPRM/CPPM . Licensing costs currently start at US$7,500/year. Software developed following this spec almost certainly can't be distributed in source form, and the license includes a requirement for forced updates. To make this more palatable to the public, Title II of this act adds a mishmash of security issues: funding research on network security, training and standards for the security of government, and internet privacy controls. After all, who could be against those things? Bleah, http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Q: How do you make the gods laugh? A: Tell them your plans. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 3:44:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ermis.cc.duth.gr (ermis.cc.duth.gr [192.108.114.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A98E337B405 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 03:44:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from duth.gr (emily.cc.duth.gr [192.108.114.21]) by ermis.cc.duth.gr (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f8IAi6380330; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 13:44:06 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kkonstan@duth.gr) Message-ID: <3BA72576.1FB99673@duth.gr> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 13:44:06 +0300 From: Konstantinos Konstantinidis Organization: I've heard of it. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en, el MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brett Glass Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Story of the walled-in server? References: <200109180450.WAA11999@lariat.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass wrote: > > I recall, some time ago, hearing a story about a BSD server that was > walled in during a renovation and kept on running for years -- until > a puzzled IT staff broke through the drywall and found it purring > happily away. Does anyone know if this story is true or apocryphal? > Any pointers would be appreciated. > > --Brett Your description reminds me of this story: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/5/18265.html That was a Novell box mind you - can't say I remember a similar story with a BSD box involved though. --kkonstan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 6:57:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns5.pacific.net.au (ns5.pacific.net.au [203.143.252.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 288A337B41A for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 06:57:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dungeon.home (ppp41.dyn248.pacific.net.au [203.143.248.41]) by ns5.pacific.net.au (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA15275; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 23:57:17 +1000 (EST) Received: from dungeon.home (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dungeon.home (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f8IE14h29150; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 00:01:04 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from mckay) Message-Id: <200109181401.f8IE14h29150@dungeon.home> To: Terry Lambert Cc: mckay@thehub.com.au, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> from Terry Lambert at "Sat, 15 Sep 2001 09:51:09 +0000" Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 00:01:03 +1000 From: Stephen McKay Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Saturday, 15th September 2001, Terry Lambert wrote: >For the man himself, from personal observation of the man and >reading of his writings, I also think RMS has many attributes >in common with Theodore Kazinski (the Unibomber). I can give >you a large laundry list, starting with his luddism, the fact >that he also has written a "Manifesto", his unkempt appearance, Hmm. A "let's dump on RMS" thread, eh? Well, he's certainly eccentric (not yet a crime), is wildly hairy (still not a crime), and writes opinionated articles (soon to be a crime if encrypted). This just makes him interesting. He's stubborn and inflexible and deeply believes in what he does. You can say that about the pope. Should everybody bend like the willow and vary their beliefs to follow the current fashions? >his appearing to have, according to the DSM IV, 5 out of the 11 >common symptoms of the rare condition Asperger's Syndrome ("Mad >Scientist's Disease" -- a variant form of autism), Now you'll have to be more specific. Are you just saying "He looks funny, so he'll probably lose it and make an undead monster soon"? >his disdain >for the rule of law (in his case, intellectual property law), >and so on. Well, he certainly opposes intellectual property law, loudly and frequently. But he doesn't break it, he uses it against people who support it. That's "disdain" I suppose, but I think you were implying criminality. >In short, RMS is a scar, a shaved head, a monocle, and a bald >cat away from being a villian in an Austin Powers movie... Hardly the way I think of him. RMS is very useful as an unwavering marker signifying the most extreme (yet viable) point of view in the intellectual property/software debate. Any further and you reach lunatic territory (illegal actions, violence, whathaveyou). At the other end you have RIAA, MPAA, and a host of leeches (sorry, I mean IP lawyers). They represent the other (possibly viable) extreme, just this side of illegal actions. I make sure what I do is between the two, and way closer to RMS. The rocks are bigger and sharper on the RIAA/MPAA side than on the RMS side of this narrow channel we are navigating. Stephen. PS Yes, I've met him. I kinda liked him, even so. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 7:32:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from po4.glue.umd.edu (po4.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.124]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4023537B41A for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 07:32:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@y.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.68]) by po4.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f8IEVow10001; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:31:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from y.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA16389; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:31:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (howardjp@localhost) by y.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA16385; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:31:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: y.glue.umd.edu: howardjp owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:31:50 -0400 (EDT) From: James Howard To: Terry Lambert Cc: Brett Glass , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Story of the walled-in server? In-Reply-To: <3BA6E609.FF37F7A8@mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 17 Sep 2001, Terry Lambert wrote: > Brett Glass wrote: > > > > I recall, some time ago, hearing a story about a BSD server that was > > walled in during a renovation and kept on running for years -- until > > a puzzled IT staff broke through the drywall and found it purring > > happily away. Does anyone know if this story is true or apocryphal? > > Any pointers would be appreciated. > > Contact John Sokol. > > It was a VAX he admin'ed, at one time in his dark past. Slashdot had a story about a Novell server this happened to: http://content.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20010409S0012 http://slashdot.org/articles/01/04/10/1846258.shtml Jamie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 8:27:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A606037B40D for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 08:27:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA19705; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 09:27:24 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 09:26:55 -0600 To: Stephen McKay , Terry Lambert From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? Cc: mckay@thehub.com.au, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200109181401.f8IE14h29150@dungeon.home> References: <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 08:01 AM 9/18/2001, Stephen McKay wrote: > Well, he's certainly >eccentric (not yet a crime), is wildly hairy (still not a crime), >and writes opinionated articles (soon to be a crime if encrypted). >This just makes him interesting. If that's all he did, it would only make him interesting. But his articles amount to propaganda, and he is attempting to lead a hateful jihaad with many of the characteristics of a terrorist action. At this point, he crosses the line between mere eccentricity and being a true threat. >Well, he certainly opposes intellectual property law, loudly and >frequently. But he doesn't break it, There's good reason to believe that he does and encourages others to do so. (Note his assertion that "piracy" should be called "sharing information with your neighbor.") >Hardly the way I think of him. RMS is very useful as an unwavering >marker signifying the most extreme (yet viable) point of view in >the intellectual property/software debate. Any further and you >reach lunatic territory (illegal actions, violence, whathaveyou). What he is doing is, in fact, likely to be illegal in that it uses the same anti-competitive and predatory tactics that Microsoft used to destroy Netscape. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 9:10: 9 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FAC837B401 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 09:10:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1D8FBD14; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 09:09:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA16230; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 09:09:57 -0700 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f8IG9Mk47190; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 09:09:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: Stephen McKay Cc: Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <200109181401.f8IE14h29150@dungeon.home> From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 18 Sep 2001 09:09:20 -0700 In-Reply-To: <200109181401.f8IE14h29150@dungeon.home> Message-ID: Lines: 36 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Stephen McKay writes: > On Saturday, 15th September 2001, Terry Lambert wrote: > > >his disdain > >for the rule of law (in his case, intellectual property law), > >and so on. > > Well, he certainly opposes intellectual property law, loudly and > frequently. But he doesn't break it, he uses it against people > who support it. That's "disdain" I suppose, but I think you > were implying criminality. http://www.progressive-comp.com/Lists/?l=berlin-design&m=93118897023514&w=2 Read the above post of his to an ML and tell us he doesn't have disdain for the rule of law (contract law in this case) and for fairness. And I see such disdain reasonably considered a disdain for people in general and take it personally. Zeal is a wonderful thing, but when it leads someone to behaviour that is, to put a book in a word, unfair, people should complain. As for criminality, I'm not sure that was implied. I'm fairly sure that including knowingly unenforcible clauses in license contracts is subject to legal sanction; probably not under criminal law, but I think that was your inference, not Terry's implication. As for IP law, Stallman clearly embraces the concept, in practice if not in law. Eliminate IP law and the closed-source developers, supported by the judicial system, would just revert to contract law, as would Stallman in his holy war to keep "free" software from being used by closed-source software developers. To be fair, Stallman's usual message reflects not a distain for the rule of law; just for particular laws. I'm sure we all have disdain for particular laws, but respect for the "rule" of even those laws. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 18:45:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from eterna.binary.net (eterna.binary.net [216.229.0.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C675337B409 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 18:45:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from matrix.binary.net (matrix.binary.net [216.229.0.2]) by eterna.binary.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CB10B44AF; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 20:45:09 -0500 (CDT) Received: by matrix.binary.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 9500A1EC4F6; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 20:45:08 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 21:45:08 -0400 From: NSA Surveillance To: Brett Glass Cc: Stephen McKay , Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? Message-ID: <20010918214508.B88740@rtfm.net> References: <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <200109181401.f8IE14h29150@dungeon.home> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost>; from brett@lariat.org on Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 09:26:55AM -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Echelon is having a field day with this thread. Could you guys cut it out so we can concentrate on the Taliban, please? Thanks! -- The NSA Guys To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 18 19: 4:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mgr2.xmission.com (mgr2.xmission.com [198.60.22.202]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9428537B401 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 19:04:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [198.60.22.22] (helo=mail.xmission.com) by mgr2.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 15jWjD-00071C-00; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 20:04:43 -0600 Received: from [166.70.9.116] (helo=blackmirror.xmission.com) by mail.xmission.com with smtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 15jWjC-0006Ed-00; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 20:04:42 -0600 From: Joe Warner To: NSA Surveillance , Brett Glass Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 20:03:32 -0600 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.28] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Stephen McKay , Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> <20010918214508.B88740@rtfm.net> In-Reply-To: <20010918214508.B88740@rtfm.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01091820035001.00268@blackmirror.xmission.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org LOL!! On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, NSA Surveillance wrote: > Echelon is having a field day with this thread. Could you guys > cut it out so we can concentrate on the Taliban, please? Thanks! > > -- The NSA Guys > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message -- Joe Warner Daemon News Bringing BSD Together Daemon News E-Zine http://www.daemonnews.org Daily Daemon News http://daily.daemonnews.org/ Print Magazine http://magazine.daemonnews.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 1:11: 2 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns3.tstt.net.tt (ns3.tstt.net.tt [196.3.132.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DBF2437B407 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 01:10:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 73404 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2001 23:00:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO uwi.tt) (209.94.221.111) by ns3.tstt.net.tt with SMTP; 18 Sep 2001 23:00:30 -0000 Message-ID: <3BA7D207.8443DC6A@uwi.tt> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 19:00:23 -0400 From: Dale Chulhan - Home Organization: COSTAATT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: issforum@iss.net, FreeBSD Questions , _FreeBSD-Chat , My List , "Trinidad And Tobago Linux Users Group List ( so called free unix guys )" , itps@opus.co.tt Subject: [OT] Book Library Addition Suggestions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello, I'm building an networking library of sorts, can any one suggest any books, either from their personal experience or from reviews that should be included. The following are some categories I'm considering: Solaris / UNIX Security / Firewalls Networking-General: TCP/IP, Design, etc. Networking-LAN/WAN: Cisco Config, Network Troubleshooting, etc. Networking-Maintainance Active Directory Exchange Also are there any magazines you guys recommend subscribing to and standards that should be bought. Thank you for your co-operation, Dale E. Chulhan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 6:43:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns5.pacific.net.au (ns5.pacific.net.au [203.143.252.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EC6737B41C for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 06:43:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dungeon.home (ppp193.dyn249.pacific.net.au [203.143.249.193]) by ns5.pacific.net.au (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA27994; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:43:16 +1000 (EST) Received: from dungeon.home (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dungeon.home (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f8JDl5i21378; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:47:05 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from mckay) Message-Id: <200109191347.f8JDl5i21378@dungeon.home> To: Brett Glass Cc: Stephen McKay , Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? References: <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> from Brett Glass at "Tue, 18 Sep 2001 09:26:55 -0600" Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:47:05 +1000 From: Stephen McKay Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tuesday, 18th September 2001, Brett Glass wrote: >At 08:01 AM 9/18/2001, Stephen McKay wrote: > >>Well, he's certainly >>eccentric (not yet a crime), is wildly hairy (still not a crime), >>and writes opinionated articles (soon to be a crime if encrypted). >>This just makes him interesting. > >If that's all he did, it would only make him interesting. But his >articles amount to propaganda, and he is attempting to lead a hateful >jihaad with many of the characteristics of a terrorist action. At >this point, he crosses the line between mere eccentricity and being >a true threat. Hmm. ``Propaganda, n: The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.'' Fair cop. But is that a problem? You do the same. So do I. So did Martin Luthor King, but he was better at it than you and me, and had a better cause. Now about this "hateful jihaad", I've seen no evidence. And "terrorist action"? What on earth do you think he has done that is remotely like a terrorist action? >>Well, he certainly opposes intellectual property law, loudly and >>frequently. But he doesn't break it, > >There's good reason to believe that he does and encourages others >to do so. (Note his assertion that "piracy" should be called "sharing >information with your neighbor.") There's quite a difference between saying "piracy == sharing" and actually illegally distributing copyrighted works. I'm sure he's said the former frequently, but I know of no cases of the latter. Saying "there's good reason to believe" is the same as saying "I really want to believe". >>Hardly the way I think of him. RMS is very useful as an unwavering >>marker signifying the most extreme (yet viable) point of view in >>the intellectual property/software debate. Any further and you >>reach lunatic territory (illegal actions, violence, whathaveyou). > >What he is doing is, in fact, likely to be illegal in that it >uses the same anti-competitive and predatory tactics that Microsoft >used to destroy Netscape. I suppose it could be illegal if RMS were a recognised software monopoly. Until that time, his actions appear to me to be completely legal (and honest too for that matter). You obviously disagree with him, but amongst intelligent people your purpose would be better served by reasoned argument against his philosophy, not by attacking his person. Stephen. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 7: 4:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns5.pacific.net.au (ns5.pacific.net.au [203.143.252.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D070437B41D for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 07:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dungeon.home (ppp193.dyn249.pacific.net.au [203.143.249.193]) by ns5.pacific.net.au (8.9.0/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA28792; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:04:30 +1000 (EST) Received: from dungeon.home (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dungeon.home (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f8JE8Ki21552; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:08:20 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from mckay) Message-Id: <200109191408.f8JE8Ki21552@dungeon.home> To: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Cc: Stephen McKay , Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <200109181401.f8IE14h29150@dungeon.home> In-Reply-To: from Gary W. Swearingen at "18 Sep 2001 09:09:20 -0700" Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:08:20 +1000 From: Stephen McKay Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tuesday, 18th September 2001, Gary W. Swearingen wrote: >Stephen McKay writes: > >> Well, he certainly opposes intellectual property law, loudly and >> frequently. But he doesn't break it, he uses it against people >> who support it. That's "disdain" I suppose, but I think you >> were implying criminality. > >http://www.progressive-comp.com/Lists/?l=berlin-design&m=93118897023514&w=2 > >Read the above post of his to an ML and tell us he doesn't have disdain >for the rule of law (contract law in this case) and for fairness. Is this the right link? This is about CORBA IDL and how since there's only one way to specify any protocol, you can't meaningfully copyright it, and hence the GPL doesn't work on it. He goes on to say you could GPL it anyway for minor FUD value. Is that what you object to? I can't see how you could object to this as it is a standard tactic used by all companies in every contract I've ever seen, and pretty much everywhere else any company as tried to go legal on anybody. Why else does every contract have that bit about still being a valid contract even if part of it is ruled invalid by a court of law? It's not a slap down argument if the worst he has done is tell somebody "What the heck, put a GPL notice on it anyway, and maybe it will have some minor effect along the lines you want". If that's the worst he's done then maybe he's a saint after all! >As for IP law, Stallman clearly embraces the concept, in practice if not >in law. There's a difference between using a thing against its makers, and embracing it. He argues against it, but uses it when he must, since it's the present environment. If he didn't use IP law, then he would be forgoing a weapon in the fight against IP law. I like those sorts of contradictions. :-) >Eliminate IP law and the closed-source developers, supported by >the judicial system, would just revert to contract law, as would Stallman >in his holy war to keep "free" software from being used by closed-source >software developers. You could well be right about that. Except for the "holy war" bit. You should be careful about words like that in today's climate, since they mean very specific things. RMS and his followers feel very strongly about certain things, mostly to do with software. They disagree with the status quo and work actively to change it. They are not involved in a holy war. Not even a bit. Stephen. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 8:13:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.inter7.com (ns1.inter7.com [209.218.8.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EE5F537B416 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 08:13:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 7176 invoked from network); 19 Sep 2001 15:06:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nitedog) (65.6.158.15) by evanston.inter7.com with SMTP; 19 Sep 2001 15:06:43 -0000 Message-ID: <000901c1411c$b5bf2fe0$0300a8c0@nitedog> Reply-To: "Randall Hamilton" From: "Randall Hamilton" To: "Gary W. Swearingen" , "Stephen McKay" Cc: "Stephen McKay" , "Terry Lambert" , References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <200109181401.f8IE14h29150@dungeon.home> <200109191408.f8JE8Ki21552@dungeon.home> Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 11:06:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > You could well be right about that. Except for the "holy war" bit. You > should be careful about words like that in today's climate, since they > mean very specific things. RMS and his followers feel very strongly > about certain things, mostly to do with software. They disagree with > the status quo and work actively to change it. They are not involved > in a holy war. Not even a bit. > > Stephen. i suppose that depends on your definition of 'holy war' Last time i checked, RMS treated open source well into the 'fanatic' department (when he is not ranting about facist Unix admins..EVIL wheel!). i would easily classify his actions as a 'holy war' or crusade. you dont really have to have a god for it to be a holy war, not in todays socity anyway. -Randall To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 13:26: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.85]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32A2A37B414 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:25:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blossom.cjclark.org (dialup-209.245.133.199.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.133.199]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA02717; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:25:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cjc@localhost) by blossom.cjclark.org (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f8JKNog01463; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:23:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cjc) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:23:40 -0700 From: "Crist J. Clark" To: Terry Lambert Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Stephen Hurd , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <20010919132340.D306@blossom.cjclark.org> Reply-To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu References: <3BA33CB6.FE0102C8@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3BA33CB6.FE0102C8@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:34:14AM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 04:34:14AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: > Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: [snip] > > What's even harder to swallow (and quite humbling) is the sense that > > many younger Germans (most I've had a chance to talk to, in fact) > > still harbor deep feelings of guilt about World War II. Americans, > > however, don't seem to think much of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, or the > > carpet bombings; history is obviously written by the winners. > > This is aggregiously incorrect. > > The U.S. is so guilt-ridden over the use of atomic weapons in > Japan that it eschews nuclear power with a fear verging on a > true phobia. In order of percentage of power generated via > nuclear energy, the U.S. ranks 10th. In order of most to least > (Source: "Energy Studies Yearbook, United Nations, 1995"), the > top 10 are: France, Belgium, Sweden, Spain, South Korea, Ukraine, > Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, United States. I loathe to join the thread, but this is so-o way off base. > Note Germany (29% nuclear powered) and Japan (28%) are much > higher up the list than the U.S. (19%). > > California PG&E customers pay a fee on their bill each month to > support the decommissioning of existing nuclear plants -- and > this decommissioning is occurring _despite_ a large enough power > crisis that rolling blackouts were occurring alost daily for > months on end: we were so afraid of nuclear power, we were getting > rid of the reactors, despite having to cut power to homes, schools, > businesses, and, in some instances, vital services on which peoples > lives may depend. Nuclear powerplants from the 50's and 60's are being decomissioned because most are operating near or well past their design lifetimes. These plants _need_ to be decommissioned. The engineers who built and run them will tell you this needs to be done. Now, as to why no new nuclear plants have been built in the past few decades is a whole separate issue. Economics, regulation, and public fear of accidents have prevented this. However, the idea that the US public feels guilty about using fission weapons against Japan is completely unfounded. > We do this _despite_ the fact that nuclear waste can be held > safely until it is itself safe, while the chemical waste from > coal-fired plants _does not break down_ -- it is dangerous > _forever_. I am wondering what type of hazardous chemical wastes from coal cumbustion you are speaking of. > So you are an idiot if you don't think that America does not > suffer _profound_ guilt over the use of nuclear weapons in the > Japan conflict; it does -- to the point of abandoning money, > working lights and heat, efficiency, and rabid environmentalism... > all to assuage that guilt. Wow. Americans are scared of nuclear powerplants because they are scared of "toxic chemicals" to the point of hysteria (Three Mile Island, Love Canal, Brookhaven, the asbestos insanity, saccharine listed as a carcinogen, etc. to name a few). But Americans by and large are and have always been comfortable having a mindbogglingly large stockpile of nuclear weapons. Actually, we've mostly worried about not having enough (Kennedy's "Missile Gap," the Reagan years). You mentioned Brookhaven later in this thread. When I used to live in the East, only that fringe of professional protesters gave a whit about Brookhaven until a report came out about the contamination in the nearby soil and groundwater. Then _and only then_ did the local media and public really care about Brookhaven. It's not some imagined guilt about using nuclear weapons on Japanese driving protests at Brookhaven, it's fear of our pal Blinky of Simpsons fame. As a chemical engineer, I could delve into how grossly disproportionate the fears of these things are as opposed to the real risks (the common irrational fears of crime and terrorism got nothing on these), but I'll spare you all. -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@alum.mit.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 13:33:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B9537B40B for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:33:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29A9ABC94; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:33:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA29228; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:33:36 -0700 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f8JKWrM47825; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 13:32:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: Stephen McKay Cc: Brett Glass , Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? References: <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> <200109191347.f8JDl5i21378@dungeon.home> From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 19 Sep 2001 13:32:52 -0700 In-Reply-To: <200109191347.f8JDl5i21378@dungeon.home> Message-ID: Lines: 53 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Stephen McKay writes: > Until that time, his actions appear to me to be completely legal (and > honest too for that matter). Legal enough to get by as far as I know; I won't argue that one. As for honesty, we mostly talking about a kind of gray area of propaganda and discussion and IP law violation in which I'm sure nobody is without sin. We're generally discussing what is fair and unfair, etc. Apparently, we have differing thresholds for "honest" here, possibly depending on our morals or probably just our biases in this particular case, but it shouldn't be suprising that a zealous leader of thousands who has devoted his life to a cause would take his zeal sometimes too far. His cause would be better served if his followers could notice some of his errors and encourage him to correct himself. Rambling on, regarding honesty and fairness: Www.gnu.org says regarding "free software": "...you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies." And it claims that "The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public,..." is protected by the GPL "for everyone". Many of us consider those statements untrue (the GPL explains in detail how one is not free to do those things) and see them as misleading as the salesman's "free wizbang" promotion. Sure, people know the real situation -- that the thing isn't really free and that there are loopholes and exceptions. They may even use the term "free" in the same context. But some of the people who use these false statements, like Stallman, know what they are doing (having been told) and continue to do it because it works in influencing people to support their cause. That's dishonest. I'm not saying it's dishonest to misuse the word "free" in "free software"; that word can mean anything (or nothing). But in plain English like I quoted above, you can't honestly say that with copyleft software one has "the freedom to copy and change" or to "release your improvements"; Bill Gates might as well say that you have the freedom to freely copy, change, and redistribute Windows -- you just have to accept his OEM licensing restrictions to gaurantee that freedom. Finally, I'll mention a commonly seen similarly untrue statement which as far as know doesn't come directly from Stallman but for which he should take the blame, by not using his leadership to discourage: Much copyleft software is labeled "this software is freely redistributable" when, in fact, one may not freely redistribute it. One is constrainted by terms and conditions of the GPL. One is NOT free to redistribute it as part of a closed-source program, for interest. The GPL gives "The precise terms and conditions for ... distribution". Free men might not have the freedom to drive on the wrong side of the road and free software might not have the freedom to be used in closed-source software, but freely redistributable software has no such terms and conditions. Someone who implies differently (and isn't merely confused himself) is trying to pull one over on you. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 14: 5:12 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from jake.akitanet.co.uk (jake.akitanet.co.uk [212.1.130.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC10937B415 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 14:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dsl-212-135-208-201.dsl.easynet.co.uk ([212.135.208.201] helo=wopr.akitanet.co.uk) by jake.akitanet.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #3) id 15joVY-000CgG-00; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:03:48 +0100 Received: from wiggy by wopr.akitanet.co.uk with local (Exim 3.21 #2) id 15joVr-000BKE-00; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:04:07 +0100 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:04:07 +0100 From: Paul Robinson To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu Cc: Terry Lambert , Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Stephen Hurd , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <20010919220407.A43466@jake.akitanet.co.uk> References: <3BA33CB6.FE0102C8@mindspring.com> <20010919132340.D306@blossom.cjclark.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010919132340.D306@blossom.cjclark.org>; from cristjc@earthlink.net on Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:23:40PM -0700 X-Scanner: exiscan *15joVY-000CgG-00*$AK$A9l0bqsR5couom7GoDDCx1* Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sep 19, "Crist J. Clark" wrote: > I loathe to join the thread, but this is so-o way off base. I was in this thread early on, and left because I didn't really feel comfortable here with my pseudo-pacifist tendancies. However, here I come back again. And to think - this is *freebsd*-chat... :-) > Now, as to why no new nuclear plants have been built in the past few > decades is a whole separate issue. Economics, regulation, and public > fear of accidents have prevented this. However, the idea that the US > public feels guilty about using fission weapons against Japan is > completely unfounded. You've actually kind of contradicted yourself there. In the 1940 and even 1950s (post-Hiroshima) nuclear power seems to have been seen as the future of mankind - although I'm too young to have witnessed what went on there at the time, I've even seen some of those 'homes of the future' films made back then that seemed to suggest that by around now every home would have it's own nuclear power source. This didn't happen for one primary reason - nuclear power was equated with nuclear war. Seeing as the only real documentary evidence of the effects of nuclear war are Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it seems sensible they are used as evidence. I don't think this has much to do with America or Japan however - we're talking more about the effects. When people see the film footage, or hear the accounts about people walking around with their skin hanging off them, millions dead, etc. and THEN go into a cold war where the primary threat is nuclear weapons, when you work for GE, you're going to have problems convincing the general public - no matter what their nationality - as to whether they want nuclear power. That's because the word nuclear is already fixed in their minds as a threat, as dangerous and something that kills people. Then, when a country manages to let one of it's plants fall into disrepair and you end up with incidents like Chernobyl, you realise that nuclear power is unlikely to be popular for some years. > I am wondering what type of hazardous chemical wastes from coal > cumbustion you are speaking of. Google for hazardous wastes of coal combustion (note the difference in spelling to the one you use) and see what you get. Coal combustion is considered by the US Government (or rather EPA) as non-hazardous, but contains toxic metals that get land-filled - arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead and mercury all feature in the lists I've seen. This issue gets clouded because 'Green' organisations will frequently scream and shout about nuclear power and waste incinerators, but seem very quiet when to comes to coal-burning. In actual fact, Greenpeace don't seem to want to talk about it all. What I would rather have is properly managed nuclear power, or even better would be cost-effective solar, wind or wave power, perhaps with some more effcient electronics in the world too. I would consider advocating pellet fuels, but don't know enough about them. In fact, I've only just found a load of papers on them whilst checking some of my facts in this post. > As a chemical engineer, I could delve into how grossly > disproportionate the fears of these things are as opposed to the real > risks (the common irrational fears of crime and terrorism got nothing > on these), but I'll spare you all. If you're a chemical engineer, I'm suprised you aren't aware of the by-products of coal combustion. I'm a Software Engineer, and even *I* know that burning coal causes huge masses of pollution and large amounts of waste that needs burying somewhere, preferably somewhere where it is above the local water table. Still, I managed to forget to put a main() in a C program the other day, so we aren't all perfect, no matter what our job titles. :-) -- PR To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 14: 6:20 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from finch-post-10.mail.demon.net (finch-post-10.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF5437B407; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 14:06:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freebsd.demon.co.uk ([194.222.171.207] helo=chemicalterrorism.com) by finch-post-10.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 15joXh-000GNE-0A; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:06:09 +0000 Received: from pain (pain.chemicalterrorism.com [192.168.0.3]) by chemicalterrorism.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 73E66F4C4; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:04:57 +0100 (BST) From: "Si" To: Cc: Subject: Banner Exchanges Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:04:56 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi, Ok, So we've got VA Linux and there banner exchange program. I actually subscribe to this on many websites since its the only open source exchange program I know of. So I figure we need a *BSD program, but without (probably) any rewards, would anyone one even, the open/net *BSD folks be interested in setting something like this up as I for one think it would with the right distribution give more of the 'limelight' to *BSDs.... Any thoughts, comments, existing sort of ideas ? Cheers, Si. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 14:27:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from jake.akitanet.co.uk (jake.akitanet.co.uk [212.1.130.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE3637B415 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 14:27:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dsl-212-135-208-201.dsl.easynet.co.uk ([212.135.208.201] helo=wopr.akitanet.co.uk) by jake.akitanet.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #3) id 15josM-000Cnh-00; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:27:22 +0100 Received: from wiggy by wopr.akitanet.co.uk with local (Exim 3.21 #2) id 15josg-000BLF-00; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:27:42 +0100 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:27:42 +0100 From: Paul Robinson To: "Gary W. Swearingen" Cc: Stephen McKay , Brett Glass , Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? Message-ID: <20010919222742.B43466@jake.akitanet.co.uk> References: <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> <200109191347.f8JDl5i21378@dungeon.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from swear@blarg.net on Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 01:32:52PM -0700 X-Scanner: exiscan *15josM-000Cnh-00*$AK$k58gj0GkDNqyksG6ls0f4.* Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sep 19, "Gary W. Swearingen" wrote: > Www.gnu.org says regarding "free software": "...you always have the > freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies." And > it claims that "The freedom to improve the program, and release your > improvements to the public,..." is protected by the GPL "for everyone". OK, the issue here is that GPL does genuinely give you those freedoms, except there are extra catches. Mainly, you have to dish out the source code. There are plenty of reasons as to why that is restricting - we don't need to go over that. However, they aren't technically lying at this point. Just obfuscating the restriction by not presenting it at the same point in the article. > They may even use the term "free" in the same context. Do we need to go over "free beer" and "free speech" again? :-) > That's dishonest. I'm not saying it's dishonest to misuse the word > "free" in "free software"; that word can mean anything (or nothing). This is not a new argument, but is one that will run and run. We're here because we use BSD, and we know it's free in a sense that we understand and the company lawyers like. My personal take on this is that we (here on the freebsd- lists) are probably here because we've decided we don't like Linux and GNU for a variety of reasons. I'm not sure if our energies are best spent arguing like they do over on various GNU and Linux lists. We know we're right. :-) Somebody came up with a quote the other day that "Linux is for people who hate Windows, FreeBSD is for people who like Unix" - I'd like to add at the end (although it loses it's poetic catchiness as a result) "GNU is for people who don't mind not being liked" > Free men might not > have the freedom to drive on the wrong side of the road and free > software might not have the freedom to be used in closed-source > software, but freely redistributable software has no such terms and > conditions. Someone who implies differently (and isn't merely confused > himself) is trying to pull one over on you. I'm British so I do have the right to drive on the 'wrong' (in fact the 'left') side of the road. :-) You are right about the difference between free software and freely redistributable software though. I think their argument boils down to 'credit where credit is due', mixed up with a lot of frankly barmy socialism. Still, like I say, if it wasn't for GNU who would we complain about? They're just jealous because we got the OS based on code that wasn't written by a load of left-wing, socialist, idealistic thinking hippies.... what's that... *Berkeley* you say? Ohhh... I see... hmph. -- PR To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 15:31:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.122]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB0937B40B for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 15:31:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blossom.cjclark.org (dialup-209.245.133.199.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.133.199]) by pintail.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA09144; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 15:31:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cjc@localhost) by blossom.cjclark.org (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f8JMVGR05860; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 15:31:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cjc) Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 15:31:16 -0700 From: "Crist J. Clark" To: Paul Robinson Cc: cjclark@alum.mit.edu, Terry Lambert , Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Stephen Hurd , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <20010919153116.G306@blossom.cjclark.org> Reply-To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu References: <3BA33CB6.FE0102C8@mindspring.com> <20010919132340.D306@blossom.cjclark.org> <20010919220407.A43466@jake.akitanet.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010919220407.A43466@jake.akitanet.co.uk>; from paul@akita.co.uk on Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 10:04:07PM +0100 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 10:04:07PM +0100, Paul Robinson wrote: > On Sep 19, "Crist J. Clark" wrote: > > > I loathe to join the thread, but this is so-o way off base. > > I was in this thread early on, and left because I didn't really feel > comfortable here with my pseudo-pacifist tendancies. However, here I come > back again. And to think - this is *freebsd*-chat... :-) > > > Now, as to why no new nuclear plants have been built in the past few > > decades is a whole separate issue. Economics, regulation, and public > > fear of accidents have prevented this. However, the idea that the US > > public feels guilty about using fission weapons against Japan is > > completely unfounded. > > You've actually kind of contradicted yourself there. In the 1940 and even > 1950s (post-Hiroshima) nuclear power seems to have been seen as the future > of mankind - although I'm too young to have witnessed what went on there at > the time, I've even seen some of those 'homes of the future' films made back > then that seemed to suggest that by around now every home would have it's > own nuclear power source. This didn't happen for one primary reason - > nuclear power was equated with nuclear war. I would say the primary reason is that the technology for small nuclear plants has never been economically realistic. Of course, the low expectation of consumer acceptance does not help research into making them so. I don't see where I contradicted myself. In the last few decades, from the 70's on, nuclear power has ground to a complete halt in the US after much excitement (and fear) in the 40's, 50's, and 60's. > > I am wondering what type of hazardous chemical wastes from coal > > cumbustion you are speaking of. > > Google for hazardous wastes of coal combustion (note the difference in > spelling to the one you use) and see what you get. Coal combustion is > considered by the US Government (or rather EPA) as non-hazardous, but > contains toxic metals that get land-filled - arsenic, cadmium, chromium, > lead and mercury all feature in the lists I've seen. Ah. Trace metals that happen to be there in the minerals. When I think coal combustion, I think about the actual products of combustion going up the stack. The bulk is water and carbon dioxide. The pollutants of primary concern in the off gasses are SOx's and NOx's (the old acid rain culprits). Getting particulates, which most of the trace metals will be (possibly exculding mercury of course), out of the stack is considered the easy part. Anyway, you are going to get that same bunch of metals and others, in higher quantities actually, when you process uranium ore. You need to do something with the uranium tailings and other processing wastes and you need to dispose of the coal ashes, which all have concentrations of these metals higher than the usual background level. > What I would rather have is properly managed nuclear power, or even better > would be cost-effective solar, wind or wave power, perhaps with some more > effcient electronics in the world too. Don't worry. All of those technologies will some day become cost effective when the cost of fossil fuels starts to pass them. As to how far away that is, it depends a whole lot on who you ask. > > As a chemical engineer, I could delve into how grossly > > disproportionate the fears of these things are as opposed to the real > > risks (the common irrational fears of crime and terrorism got nothing > > on these), but I'll spare you all. > > If you're a chemical engineer, I'm suprised you aren't aware of the > by-products of coal combustion. They are not really by-products since they are all there in the coal when you start. It's just that they are also left over when you are done whereas most of the carbon, which is the bulk of the mass, has gone up the stack. The metals are left in a more concentrated form. The same thing happens if you burn a _lot_ of anything, oil, wood, garbage, etc. (natural gas being an exception for obvious reasons). Anyway, building landfills is for the environmental and civil engineers to worry about. ;) -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@alum.mit.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 21:13:54 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 170C037B415 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:13:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA21430; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:13:35 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010919212628.04442b60@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:30:05 -0600 To: Stephen McKay From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? Cc: Stephen McKay , Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200109191347.f8JDl5i21378@dungeon.home> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913023437.045fae70@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913002733.05261930@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010912203732.0492cc80@localhost> <20010912225151.58FCD37B40B@hub.freebsd.org> <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 07:47 AM 9/19/2001, Stephen McKay wrote: >I suppose it could be illegal if RMS were a recognised software monopoly. Not true. Anti-competitive tactics such as "dumping" for the purpose of destroying businesses are illegal whether or not one has a monopoly. See the US's Robinson-Patman Act and the many state laws restricting unfair business practices. (I don't know what the statutes are Down Under, but would wager that there are similar laws there. Probably stricter ones, in fact, based on what I *have* seen of Australian law.) --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 21:14: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D10B37B41F for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:14:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA21436; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:13:43 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010919213131.04442ee0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:32:44 -0600 To: Paul Robinson , "Gary W. Swearingen" From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? Cc: Stephen McKay , Terry Lambert , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20010919222742.B43466@jake.akitanet.co.uk> References: <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> <200109191347.f8JDl5i21378@dungeon.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 03:27 PM 9/19/2001, Paul Robinson wrote: >OK, the issue here is that GPL does genuinely give you those freedoms, >except there are extra catches. "Extra catches" are part and parcel of deceptive practices the world over. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 21:46:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A18EF37B428; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:46:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f8K4jv628415; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:46:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Si" , Cc: Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:45:57 -0700 Message-ID: <006501c1418f$238f30c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello Si, What are you possibly talking about?!?!? I went to VA Linux's website and I see no banners there. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Si >Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 2:05 PM >To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG >Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Banner Exchanges > > >Hi, > >Ok, So we've got VA Linux and there banner exchange program. I actually >subscribe to this on many websites since its the only open source exchange >program I know of. So I figure we need a *BSD program, but without >(probably) any rewards, would anyone one even, the open/net *BSD folks be >interested in setting something like this up as I for one think it would >with the right distribution give more of the 'limelight' to *BSDs.... > >Any thoughts, comments, existing sort of ideas ? > >Cheers, > > >Si. > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 22: 6:22 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from server1.lordlegacy.org (lordlegacy.org [209.61.182.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 162CF37B405; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:06:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sharon ([216.13.207.127]) by server1.lordlegacy.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA20621; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 19:17:46 -0500 From: "Stephen Hurd" To: "Ted Mittelstaedt" , "Si" , Cc: Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:16:52 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <006501c1418f$238f30c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Hello Si, > > What are you possibly talking about?!?!? > > I went to VA Linux's website and I see no banners there. Hmmm... maybe he means the SourceForge banners... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 22: 8:49 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.85]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B7E37B417 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:08:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.244.105.62.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.244.105.62]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA11604; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:08:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3BA97A05.B14F6ACF@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:09:25 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Stephen Hurd , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <3BA33CB6.FE0102C8@mindspring.com> <20010919132340.D306@blossom.cjclark.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Crist J. Clark" wrote: > Nuclear powerplants from the 50's and 60's are being decomissioned > because most are operating near or well past their design > lifetimes. These plants _need_ to be decommissioned. The engineers who > built and run them will tell you this needs to be done. I think you need to look up the nuclear plants that are currently in operation in California, along with the list of the ones being decomissioned, and compare them with their dates of construction. I think you'll find that your statement doesn't hold water (inre: "from the 50's and 60's"). > Now, as to why no new nuclear plants have been built in the past few > decades is a whole separate issue. Economics, regulation, and public > fear of accidents have prevented this. However, the idea that the US > public feels guilty about using fission weapons against Japan is > completely unfounded. I disagree, but then my education included playing aroud with a real reactor. > > We do this _despite_ the fact that nuclear waste can be held > > safely until it is itself safe, while the chemical waste from > > coal-fired plants _does not break down_ -- it is dangerous > > _forever_. > > I am wondering what type of hazardous chemical wastes from coal > cumbustion you are speaking of. Hydrocarbon byproducts from combustion which are ejected into the atmosphere, and are not broken down due to photo exposure... only as the result of being metabolized by something/one. > You mentioned Brookhaven later in this thread. When I used to live in > the East, only that fringe of professional protesters gave a whit > about Brookhaven until a report came out about the contamination in > the nearby soil and groundwater. Then _and only then_ did the local > media and public really care about Brookhaven. It's not some imagined > guilt about using nuclear weapons on Japanese driving protests at > Brookhaven, it's fear of our pal Blinky of Simpsons fame. Find me a "blinky", and I'll believe you. > As a chemical engineer, I could delve into how grossly > disproportionate the fears of these things are as opposed to the real > risks (the common irrational fears of crime and terrorism got nothing > on these), but I'll spare you all. Nuclear materials are feared because of our object lessons on what they _can_ do, not based on what we fear they might do. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 22:22:37 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.85]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA5B737B41D for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:22:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.244.105.62.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.244.105.62]) by gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA19781; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:22:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3BA97D33.976CBEFD@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:22:59 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu Cc: Paul Robinson , Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Stephen Hurd , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <3BA33CB6.FE0102C8@mindspring.com> <20010919132340.D306@blossom.cjclark.org> <20010919220407.A43466@jake.akitanet.co.uk> <20010919153116.G306@blossom.cjclark.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Crist J. Clark" wrote: > > > I am wondering what type of hazardous chemical wastes from coal > > > cumbustion you are speaking of. > > > > Google for hazardous wastes of coal combustion (note the difference in > > spelling to the one you use) and see what you get. Coal combustion is > > considered by the US Government (or rather EPA) as non-hazardous, but > > contains toxic metals that get land-filled - arsenic, cadmium, chromium, > > lead and mercury all feature in the lists I've seen. > > Ah. Trace metals that happen to be there in the minerals. When I think > coal combustion, I think about the actual products of combustion going > up the stack. The bulk is water and carbon dioxide. The pollutants of > primary concern in the off gasses are SOx's and NOx's (the old acid > rain culprits). Getting particulates, which most of the trace metals > will be (possibly exculding mercury of course), out of the stack is > considered the easy part. "Nuclear waste" Ah. Trace metals that happen to be there in the pitchblende. When I think of nuclear energy, I think about the actual products of the decayed nuclei going into vitreous containers. The bulk is much less radioactive than the original refined Uranium. The pollutants if primary concern in the byproducts are things that, if you mixed them with the original mining tailing from which the Uranium was refined, and buried them back in the same hole, would, in general, be safer than what started out there. Getting rid of the waste that way would be easy and preferrable (excluding politicians trying to dictate the laws of physics of course) to the alternative. > Anyway, you are going to get that same bunch of metals and others, in > higher quantities actually, when you process uranium ore. You need to > do something with the uranium tailings and other processing wastes and > you need to dispose of the coal ashes, which all have concentrations of > these metals higher than the usual background level. Luckily, we have these holes, called "Uranium mines", where we know that they would be safe, since they've already been safe there for billions of years so far. > They are not really by-products since they are all there in the coal > when you start. Benzene? Long chain hydrocarbons? -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 23:16:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from vnode.vmunix.com (vnode.vmunix.com [209.112.4.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7770737B41E; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:16:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix, from userid 1005) id C334814; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:16:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A930449A15; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:16:40 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:16:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Chris Coleman To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: Si , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges In-Reply-To: <006501c1418f$238f30c0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org They do some non-profit banner exchanges on their sourceforge.net sites. Daemon News is doing several Banner Exchanges with non-profit BSD sites already, but we don't have a formal program set up. Maybe we should. We can handle the banner ads. Chris Coleman Editor in Chief Daemon News E-Zine http://www.daemonnews.org Print Magazine http://magazine.daemonnews.org Open Packages http://www.openpackages.org On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > Hello Si, > > What are you possibly talking about?!?!? > > I went to VA Linux's website and I see no banners there. > > > Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com > Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide > Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Si > >Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 2:05 PM > >To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG > >Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG > >Subject: Banner Exchanges > > > > > >Hi, > > > >Ok, So we've got VA Linux and there banner exchange program. I actually > >subscribe to this on many websites since its the only open source exchange > >program I know of. So I figure we need a *BSD program, but without > >(probably) any rewards, would anyone one even, the open/net *BSD folks be > >interested in setting something like this up as I for one think it would > >with the right distribution give more of the 'limelight' to *BSDs.... > > > >Any thoughts, comments, existing sort of ideas ? > > > >Cheers, > > > > > >Si. > > > > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 23:20:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AA6B37B41E; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:20:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f8K6KT628648; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:20:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Chris Coleman" Cc: "Si" , , Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:20:29 -0700 Message-ID: <009f01c1419c$582afb40$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >-----Original Message----- >From: Chris Coleman [mailto:chrisc@vmunix.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:17 PM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: Si; freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG; freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges > > >They do some non-profit banner exchanges on their sourceforge.net >sites. Daemon News is doing several Banner Exchanges with non-profit BSD >sites already, but we don't have a formal program set up. Maybe we >should. We can handle the banner ads. > Well - you can do what you want but I've read that the clickthroughs on banner advertising are miserable - in general not worth the time unless your running a porno site or something like that which is generating millions of hits a day. I would be very interested in any stats you can generate as a result of something like this, should you decide to do it. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Sep 19 23:40:29 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from vnode.vmunix.com (vnode.vmunix.com [209.112.4.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9519837B409; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 23:40:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix, from userid 1005) id DC9EA14; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:40:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C471C49A15; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:40:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:40:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Chris Coleman To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: Si , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges In-Reply-To: <009f01c1419c$582afb40$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Well - you can do what you want but I've read that the clickthroughs > on banner advertising are miserable - in general not worth the time > unless your running a porno site or something like that which is generating > millions of hits a day. > > I would be very interested in any stats you can generate as a result of > something like this, should you decide to do it. Yeah, the industry standard on click-thrus is about 0.6 % We ran the Apple banners as part of their WWDC promotion and averaged about that. However, when we run ads that have "BSD" in them, we get around 2% - 5% click-thru rate. If the ad has run a long time, that goes down of course. We also don't run that many ads. We currently don't have ads on our articles in the DN ezine. The hardest part about running banner ads is trying to sell them. If the banner ad is good, they actually do quite well. We ran a 125 x 125 ad for the "Bastard Operator from Hell" and it had about a 3-4% click thru rate. Here are the stats for your 125 x 125 book ad (FreeBSD Corp Guide) that we are running. Views Clicks Rate 25818 733 2.84% Here are the stats for the bofh book stats. 84577 2873 3.40% Here are the stats for the Apple Ads. 416601 3178 0.76% I expect that if the Apple Ads were targetted towards the BSD community, they might have done better. -Chris Coleman To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 0:14:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from vnode.vmunix.com (vnode.vmunix.com [209.112.4.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FAD237B417; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:14:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix, from userid 1005) id E95B214; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 03:14:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vnode.vmunix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E20A349A15; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 03:14:46 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 03:14:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Chris Coleman To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: Si , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Views Clicks Rate > 25818 733 2.84% > > Here are the stats for the bofh book stats. > 84577 2873 3.40% > Just to be fair, I thought I'd give out some more information and explain that these are two of the better performing ads that we have. Where they are posted does make a difference as well. We ran the BOFH ad on Daily and we got: 57582 1385 2.41% When we ran the same ad on the front page of the ezine, we got: 26999 1489 5.52% Most of this has to do with the number or unique visitors we get to the front page of the ezine vs Daily. We get alot of repeat visitors to Daily, so the page views go up, but the click thrus don't, because people have already seen the ad several times. Just in case you were wondering, The FreeBSD ads we are running get 1.37% click thru The NetBSD ads we are running get 1.42% click thru. The OpenBSD ads we are running get 1.53% click thru. The Daemon News in house ads get 1.55% click thru. -Chris To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 0:30: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B98037B40B for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:29:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blossom.cjclark.org (dialup-209.247.142.171.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.247.142.171]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f8K7TqY02300; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:29:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from cjc@localhost) by blossom.cjclark.org (8.11.4/8.11.3) id f8K7TmC07071; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:29:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cjc) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 00:29:48 -0700 From: "Crist J. Clark" To: Terry Lambert Cc: cjclark@alum.mit.edu, Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Stephen Hurd , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <20010920002948.A6942@blossom.cjclark.org> Reply-To: cjclark@alum.mit.edu References: <3BA33CB6.FE0102C8@mindspring.com> <20010919132340.D306@blossom.cjclark.org> <3BA97A05.B14F6ACF@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3BA97A05.B14F6ACF@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 10:09:25PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 10:09:25PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: > "Crist J. Clark" wrote: > > Nuclear powerplants from the 50's and 60's are being decomissioned > > because most are operating near or well past their design > > lifetimes. These plants _need_ to be decommissioned. The engineers who > > built and run them will tell you this needs to be done. > > I think you need to look up the nuclear plants that are > currently in operation in California, along with the list > of the ones being decomissioned, and compare them with > their dates of construction. I haven't been able to find a list of ones being decommissioned other than some experimental sites. I also believe that utilities can collect for _future_ decommissioning costs even while a powerplant is still in operation. > I think you'll find that your statement doesn't hold water > (inre: "from the 50's and 60's"). Yeah, I was off. The ones currently in use were designed in the 60's, built in the 70's, and came on line in the early 80's. In the US, the last order for a new nuclear plant that was actually completed was made in 1973. I am not aware of any full-scale nuclear powerplants being fully decommissioned, only experimental plants from the timeframe I mentioned. I could very well be mistaken though. > > > We do this _despite_ the fact that nuclear waste can be held > > > safely until it is itself safe, while the chemical waste from > > > coal-fired plants _does not break down_ -- it is dangerous > > > _forever_. > > > > I am wondering what type of hazardous chemical wastes from coal > > cumbustion you are speaking of. > > Hydrocarbon byproducts from combustion which are ejected into > the atmosphere, and are not broken down due to photo exposure... > only as the result of being metabolized by something/one. If it is metabolized by something it does not last forever. Hydrocarbons do not generally last that long in an oxidizing atmosphere or else it would be chock full of 'em by now since they are a by-product of combustion of pretty much any organic material. There have been forest and grass fires, volcanic eruptions, natural eruptions of fossil fuels, etc. pumping these types of materials into the atmosphere for a lot longer than there have been people and they have not built up. Not that humans have not tried pretty hard to crank this stuff out really, really fast for the last few centuries. > > You mentioned Brookhaven later in this thread. When I used to live in > > the East, only that fringe of professional protesters gave a whit > > about Brookhaven until a report came out about the contamination in > > the nearby soil and groundwater. Then _and only then_ did the local > > media and public really care about Brookhaven. It's not some imagined > > guilt about using nuclear weapons on Japanese driving protests at > > Brookhaven, it's fear of our pal Blinky of Simpsons fame. > > Find me a "blinky", and I'll believe you. Here's a quote from the "Covert Action Quarterly" from the period (mid-90's), BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LAB: THE CANCER CONNECTION . . . . .. . . . . . . 21 by Laura Flanders For almost half a century, Brookhaven Lab has been spewing out toxic waste and radioactive poison. Alarmed at a high incidence of breast cancer, women in the area are calling for action. No moral outrage or guilt dealing with nuclear weapons. Fear of contamination and cancer. > > As a chemical engineer, I could delve into how grossly > > disproportionate the fears of these things are as opposed to the real > > risks (the common irrational fears of crime and terrorism got nothing > > on these), but I'll spare you all. > > Nuclear materials are feared because of our object lessons on > what they _can_ do, not based on what we fear they might do. I miss the distinction. We all know what they can do so we worry about what a release might do. I definately buy that that is what people worry about. But I really have never detected guilt over using nuclear weapons having anything to do with it. -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@alum.mit.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 2: 4:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7D4237B408; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:04:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f8K94c629342; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:04:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Chris Coleman" Cc: "Si" , , Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:04:38 -0700 Message-ID: <00b401c141b3$46dfad60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Wow - that's a lot better than I thought! That's on par with direct mail response rates, quite amazing! Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com >-----Original Message----- >From: Chris Coleman [mailto:chrisc@vmunix.com] >Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 12:15 AM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: Si; freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG; freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges > > >> Views Clicks Rate >> 25818 733 2.84% >> >> Here are the stats for the bofh book stats. >> 84577 2873 3.40% >> > >Just to be fair, I thought I'd give out some more information and explain >that these are two of the better performing ads that we have. > >Where they are posted does make a difference as well. > >We ran the BOFH ad on Daily and we got: > 57582 1385 2.41% > >When we ran the same ad on the front page of the ezine, we got: > 26999 1489 5.52% > >Most of this has to do with the number or unique visitors we get to the >front page of the ezine vs Daily. We get alot of repeat visitors to >Daily, so the page views go up, but the click thrus don't, because people >have already seen the ad several times. > >Just in case you were wondering, > >The FreeBSD ads we are running get 1.37% click thru >The NetBSD ads we are running get 1.42% click thru. >The OpenBSD ads we are running get 1.53% click thru. >The Daemon News in house ads get 1.55% click thru. > >-Chris > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 2: 7:29 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F32E37B40F; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:07:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f8K97J629356; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:07:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Chris Coleman" Cc: "Si" , , Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 02:07:19 -0700 Message-ID: <00b501c141b3$a6ed3740$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >-----Original Message----- >From: Chris Coleman [mailto:chrisc@vmunix.com] >Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 11:40 PM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: Si; freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG; freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges > > >Here are the stats for the Apple Ads. > 416601 3178 0.76% > >I expect that if the Apple Ads were targetted towards the BSD community, >they might have done better. > Yep - it's kind of a problem when Steve Jobs gets up at a convention and announces that MacOS X is based on the Linux OS. ;-) Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 3:14:10 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from jake.akitanet.co.uk (jake.akitanet.co.uk [212.1.130.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2B8137B418; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 03:14:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dsl-212-135-208-201.dsl.easynet.co.uk ([212.135.208.201] helo=wopr.akitanet.co.uk) by jake.akitanet.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #3) id 15k0pu-000Gr1-00; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 11:13:38 +0100 Received: from wiggy by wopr.akitanet.co.uk with local (Exim 3.21 #2) id 15k0q4-000BqM-00; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 11:13:48 +0100 Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 11:13:48 +0100 From: Paul Robinson To: Ted Mittelstaedt Cc: Chris Coleman , Si , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Banner Exchanges Message-ID: <20010920111348.C43679@jake.akitanet.co.uk> References: <009f01c1419c$582afb40$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <009f01c1419c$582afb40$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>; from tedm@toybox.placo.com on Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 11:20:29PM -0700 X-Scanner: exiscan *15k0pu-000Gr1-00*$AK$Ra/W2rwAu/HIu1MQ0QESV.* Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sep 20, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > Well - you can do what you want but I've read that the clickthroughs > on banner advertising are miserable - in general not worth the time > unless your running a porno site or something like that which is generating > millions of hits a day. Translation: "I hate banner ads because although I get suckered into clicking on banners on the porn sites I browse, when I spent 10k with doubleclick last month I didn't get millions of hits on my website" > I would be very interested in any stats you can generate as a result of > something like this, should you decide to do it. Translation: "Please give me some market research for free... " Perhaps I'm getting too cynical. :-) -- PR To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 5: 8:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smeg.twowaytv.co.uk (smeg.twowaytv.co.uk [194.6.2.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9201137B406 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 05:08:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (alex@localhost) by smeg.twowaytv.co.uk (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f8KC8dN12122 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 13:08:39 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from adyas@twowaytv.com) X-Authentication-Warning: r2d2.twowaytv.co.uk: alex owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 13:08:36 +0100 (BST) From: Alex Dyas X-X-Sender: To: Subject: FreeBSD and Intel Solaris Message-ID: <20010920125718.E43775-100000@r2d2.twowaytv.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org hi, i'm trying to make a case for using FreeBSD as the OS for a load of PCs we need to do monitoring. the machines will be running a bunch of in house developed scripts (shell, perl etc) and other simple stuff like tails on log files etc, then making the results available via VNC. the main contender at the moment is Solaris on Intel, mainly because the other sys admins come from Sparc/Solaris environments. this is something that i can see a lot of sense in, stick with what you know best. however, i'm just not convinced that Solaris on Intel is a mature enough technology to be basing a lot of stock in. from my experience, FreeBSD has a far more established user base, and probably has much better hardware compatibility. also support is very good, something i'm not sure is true for solaris-intel. anyone here have any Solaris on Intel experience, good or bad? I'm trying to be objective here. I need a good argument. It may even be that FreeBSD isn't suited on this particular occasion. thanks, alex.. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 5:38: 4 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-94-248-46.mmcable.com [24.94.248.46]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 373D937B408 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 05:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 63545 invoked by uid 100); 20 Sep 2001 12:37:59 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15273.58150.984582.17112@guru.mired.org> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 07:37:58 -0500 To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RMS: A threat to society? In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010919213131.04442ee0@localhost> References: <20010912215547.98067.qmail@web20806.mail.yahoo.com> <01091219512600.11358@proxy.the-i-pa.com> <20010912225428.A9675@citusc17.usc.edu> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913021952.045974f0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010913185102.0497c9e0@localhost> <15266.22869.722204.601040@guru.mired.org> <3BA3248D.5E47FDC9@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20010918092037.046e2a90@localhost> <200109191347.f8JDl5i21378@dungeon.home> <4.3.2.7.2.20010919213131.04442ee0@localhost> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > >OK, the issue here is that GPL does genuinely give you those freedoms, > >except there are extra catches. > "Extra catches" are part and parcel of deceptive practices the world > over. The most egregious example I know of of such "extra catches" are those associated with walking into a store to buy some commercial software. Turns out that you almost never actually buy software - what you buy is a box, some documentation, and disks with software that you now have a license to use. The license almost inevitably makes it illegal to do things that you could do if you had actually done what the producer and retailer said you were doing, and bought the software. The more such things the license makes illegal, the more deceptive the practice. Many such licenses allow the producer to revoke your license to use the software without compensation! On that basis, the GPL is much less deceptive - and hence presumably more honest and moral - than most commercial software licenses. The various BSD licenses are even better, and the only ones that come anywhere close to letting the user "own the software." While I'm posting, I'd like to point out that Terry's subject is ambiguous - he failed to specify which "society" he was talking about. That can lead to confusion. For example, Islamic terrorists are no threat to Islamic society. The same thing applies to RMS. Since the vast majority of people in the world don't have access to a computer, he's clearly no threat to most of society. Limiting things to the society of software producers, the last time it got thrashed out the conclusion was that the only people really threatened by RMS et. al. were Bill Gates wannabes. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Q: How do you make the gods laugh? A: Tell them your plans. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 9:21: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail012.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail012.syd.optusnet.com.au [203.2.75.172]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714C237B40E for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 09:21:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from optusnet.com.au (golax8-061.dialup.optusnet.com.au [198.142.182.61]) by mail012.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f8KGKwm15968 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 02:20:58 +1000 Message-ID: <3BAA1819.3A509B27@optusnet.com.au> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 02:23:53 +1000 From: Ian Pulsford X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.3-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Intel Solaris References: <20010920125718.E43775-100000@r2d2.twowaytv.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Alex Dyas wrote: > > hi, > > i'm trying to make a case for using FreeBSD as the OS for a load of PCs we need > to do monitoring. the machines will be running a bunch of in house developed > scripts (shell, perl etc) and other simple stuff like tails on log files etc, > then making the results available via VNC. > > the main contender at the moment is Solaris on Intel, mainly because the other > sys admins come from Sparc/Solaris environments. this is something that i can > see a lot of sense in, stick with what you know best. > > however, i'm just not convinced that Solaris on Intel is a mature enough > technology to be basing a lot of stock in. from my experience, FreeBSD has a > far more established user base, and probably has much better hardware > compatibility. also support is very good, something i'm not sure is true for > solaris-intel. Hardware compatability for Solaris x86 will be your biggest problem. Check out the HCL to see if your hardware will work. I could never get the thing to work well with my hardware. But now I have a shiny new SunBlade 100 so's I can run Solaris/Sparc. > > anyone here have any Solaris on Intel experience, good or bad? > > I'm trying to be objective here. I need a good argument. It may even be that > FreeBSD isn't suited on this particular occasion. IanP To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 9:36:15 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from riker.skynet.be (riker.skynet.be [195.238.3.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B8EB37B410 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 09:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [194.78.144.27] ([194.78.144.27]) by riker.skynet.be (8.11.6/8.11.6/Skynet-OUT-2.15) with ESMTP id f8KGa1q08704; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:36:01 +0200 (MET DST) (envelope-from ) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: brad.knowles@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20010920125718.E43775-100000@r2d2.twowaytv.co.uk> References: <20010920125718.E43775-100000@r2d2.twowaytv.co.uk> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:25:55 +0200 To: Alex Dyas , From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: FreeBSD and Intel Solaris Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 1:08 PM +0100 9/20/01, Alex Dyas wrote: > however, i'm just not convinced that Solaris on Intel is a mature enough > technology to be basing a lot of stock in. from my experience, FreeBSD has a > far more established user base, and probably has much better hardware > compatibility. also support is very good, something i'm not sure is true for > solaris-intel. > > anyone here have any Solaris on Intel experience, good or bad? Sun is involved with Solaris on Intel but not committed, whereas it is committed to Solaris on SPARC (think about it -- the chicken is involved in making breakfast, but the pig is committed). This is basically a "play" environment for Solaris, to allow people to familiarize themselves with it, and then convince them to upgrade to a "real" Solaris machine on SPARC. Familiarity with the OS gets you so far. But when support for all sorts of standard (and not-so-standard) hardware isn't there, patches are either non-existent or way, way, way behind their SPARC equivalents, and Linux or FreeBSD can handle probably ten times the load of Solaris on that same machine (from my own personal experience, based on taking down an old Solaris/x86 box as an anonymous ftp server and rebuilding it first with Linux and then later with FreeBSD), I really don't think that there is much of a real comparison to be made. > I'm trying to be objective here. I need a good argument. It may >even be that > FreeBSD isn't suited on this particular occasion. Depends on the purpose of the machines. If this is to create simple X terminals sitting on people's desks, then Solaris/x86 may be a good choice -- the load probably won't be high, and the operating environment will be familiar. However, if the plan is to run "real" services on those machines, I would challenge you to find a Solaris/x86 configuration that could come anywhere remotely close to performing as well as Linux or FreeBSD on that same machine. However, the only real way to know is to try it. So, give it a shot, and let us know how things work out -- if FreeBSD isn't the best choice for your particular application, let us know why and where FreeBSD falls down, and maybe this can be fixed in the near future. -- Brad Knowles, H4sICIFgXzsCA2RtYS1zaWcAPVHLbsMwDDvXX0H0kkvbfxiwVw8FCmzAzqqj1F4dy7CdBfn7 Kc6wmyGRFEnvvxiWQoCvqI7RSWTcfGXQNqCUAnfIU+AT8OZ/GCNjRVlH0bKpguJkxiITZqes MxwpSucyDJzXxQEUe/ihgXqJXUXwD9ajB6NHonLmNrUSK9nacHQnH097szO74xFXqtlbT3il wMsBz5cnfCR5cEmci0Rj9u/jqBbPeES1I4PeFBXPUIT1XDSOuutFXylzrQvGyboWstCoQZyP dxX4dLx0eauFe1x9puhoi0Ao1omEJo+BZ6XLVNaVpWiKekxN0VK2VMpmAy+Bk7ZV4SO+p1L/ uErNRS/qH2iFU+iNOtbcmVt9N16lfF7tLv9FXNj8AiyNcOi1AQAA To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 10:15:12 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from pilchuck.reedmedia.net (pilchuck.reedmedia.net [63.145.197.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66C5837B41D for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 10:15:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from reed by pilchuck.reedmedia.net with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 15k7Pk-0003cz-00; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 10:15:04 -0700 Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 10:15:04 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jeremy C. Reed" To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges In-Reply-To: <00b401c141b3$46dfad60$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org (No longer Cc'd to advocacy -- this is off-topic.) On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > Wow - that's a lot better than I thought! That's on par with > direct mail response rates, quite amazing! But how does this compare with actual sales? Clicking on a banner ad is very quick and easy. I'd say that responding to a direct mail (by phone or filling out a postcard) implies more interest (and more likely to lead to a sale). Jeremy C. Reed http://www.reedmedia.net/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 20 21:25: 7 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.169.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B95337B414; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:24:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tedm.placo.com (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [206.29.168.154]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f8L4Oi631449; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:24:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Paul Robinson" Cc: "Chris Coleman" , "Si" , , Subject: RE: Banner Exchanges Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:24:43 -0700 Message-ID: <000001c14255$56838dc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 In-Reply-To: <20010920111348.C43679@jake.akitanet.co.uk> Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >-----Original Message----- >From: wiggy [mailto:wiggy@wopr.akitanet.co.uk]On Behalf Of Paul Robinson >Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 3:14 AM >To: Ted Mittelstaedt >Cc: Chris Coleman; Si; freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG; >freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >Subject: Re: Banner Exchanges > > >On Sep 20, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > >> Well - you can do what you want but I've read that the clickthroughs >> on banner advertising are miserable - in general not worth the time >> unless your running a porno site or something like that which is generating >> millions of hits a day. > >Translation: "I hate banner ads because although I get suckered into >clicking on banners on the porn sites I browse, when I spent 10k with >doubleclick last month I didn't get millions of hits on my website" > No, I get all my porn off Usenet, it's free. Seriously, though, I've never spent a dime on advertising on the Internet. >> I would be very interested in any stats you can generate as a result of >> something like this, should you decide to do it. > >Translation: "Please give me some market research for free... " > Of course. However, it's his choice to give it out and I have no intention of commencing spending on Internet advertising no matter what the results are. You see, I happen to work for an ISP - and I've seen the damage that was done to ISP's by the now-repudiated business plans to hand out Internet access for free in exchange for shoved-down-your-throat banner advertising. As long as I work for an ISP, spending money on banner ads is in effect supporting a paradigm that is in total opposition to what my livlihood is. I may be missing something, but in my life I've observed that advertising-funded businesses are inherently resting on a foundation that's now proven to be unsupportable. You take television. Over the years, TV ads have become more and more ineffectual as people have been trained to ignore them. As a result to get the same effect, "free" TV channels have had to devote more and more of the time of a show to advertising. This is a vicious circle because the more advertising that's displayed, the more desensitized to it the public becomes, the less effective it is, the more must be displayed to maintain the same effect, etc. All the time the funding from the ad revenue is getting less and less, and as the costs of producing TV shows go ever higher, a vise is created which is starving the TV shows of decent funding. As a result, there's more and more crap on TV that nobody wants to watch, which results in lower ratings, which is another vicious cycle. Ultimately TV is going to end up with the advertising being sold for a few cents, and it occupying 60% of the show time, and the shows being produced in sweatshops in the Third World that will be the most boring thing you can imagine. Now, I suppose if you want the Internet to go that way, why then banner ads are a Good Thing I guess. But I would never support them. >Perhaps I'm getting too cynical. :-) > Amateur. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 21 3:35:18 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mailout05.sul.t-online.de (mailout05.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.82]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57ACB37B427 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 03:35:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fwd01.sul.t-online.de by mailout05.sul.t-online.de with smtp id 15kNeM-00028f-06; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 12:35:14 +0200 Received: from pc5.abc (520067998749-0001@[217.80.36.161]) by fmrl01.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 15kNe3-0Z72COC; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 12:34:55 +0200 Received: (from nicolas@localhost) by pc5.abc (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f8L9KIx01286 for chat@freebsd.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 11:20:18 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from list@rachinsky.de) X-Authentication-Warning: pc5.abc: nicolas set sender to list@rachinsky.de using -f Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 11:20:18 +0200 From: Nicolas Rachinsky To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: chapter 11 Re: FreeBSD 4.4 upcoming release/timetabling/mirroring Message-ID: <20010921112018.B1226@pc5.abc> Mail-Followup-To: chat@freebsd.org References: <20010420111439.Q5017@casimir.physics.purdue.edu> <20010910093357K.jkh@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010910093357K.jkh@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i X-Sender: 520067998749-0001@t-dialin.net Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I have a question about the expression "they're chapter 11" below: On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 09:33:57AM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > I must have missed the attached rant from Will, but let me first just > say this: Forget about Lightning Internet - they're chapter 11 and out > of the picture. ftp.freesoftware.com, RIP. Is it an commonly used idiom? Where does it come from? I think, I know what is meant. Thanks Nicolas To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 21 4:13: 2 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from riker.skynet.be (riker.skynet.be [195.238.3.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D83137B407 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 04:12:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [194.78.144.27] ([194.78.144.27]) by riker.skynet.be (8.11.6/8.11.6/Skynet-OUT-2.15) with ESMTP id f8LBCoq12617; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:12:50 +0200 (MET DST) (envelope-from ) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: brad.knowles@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20010921112018.B1226@pc5.abc> References: <20010420111439.Q5017@casimir.physics.purdue.edu> <20010910093357K.jkh@freebsd.org> <20010921112018.B1226@pc5.abc> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 13:12:22 +0200 To: Nicolas Rachinsky , chat@freebsd.org From: Brad Knowles Subject: Re: chapter 11 Re: FreeBSD 4.4 upcoming release/timetabling/mirroring Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 11:20 AM +0200 9/21/01, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote: >> I must have missed the attached rant from Will, but let me first just >> say this: Forget about Lightning Internet - they're chapter 11 and out >> of the picture. ftp.freesoftware.com, RIP. > > Is it an commonly used idiom? Where does it come from? The term "Chapter 11" refers to a particular section of US bankruptcy code. The idea is that the company is able to continue to operate relatively normally, with protection from all its creditors while it seeks to arrange suitable terms for refinancing all of its loans, etc.... If they fail to make suitable arrangements in the specified time, then the company is sent to liquidators who sell off all the various assets and try to get as much money for them as they can. What money is obtained from the sales of the assets then gets paid out to the creditors, usually for just a small fraction of what the real monetary liability (i.e., "for pennies on the dollar"). Therefore, if you are a company in a business where you are likely to be a creditor, you probably want to make arrangements with your customers so that you are given preferential treatment whenever it comes to Chapter 11 proceedings, liquidation, etc.... This way if they go bankrupt, you still have a decent chance of being able to recover all or most of the money they owe you -- of course, doing so really screws the other creditors, so knowing this all creditors will try to ensure that they are the ones at the front of the line, as opposed to anyone else. Many people and companies manage to come out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy just fine, but many also fail permanently. Being in "Chapter 11" is not necessarily a guaranteed death knoll, but it is certainly one of the first bars of what is likely to become your requiem. -- Brad Knowles, H4sICIFgXzsCA2RtYS1zaWcAPVHLbsMwDDvXX0H0kkvbfxiwVw8FCmzAzqqj1F4dy7CdBfn7 Kc6wmyGRFEnvvxiWQoCvqI7RSWTcfGXQNqCUAnfIU+AT8OZ/GCNjRVlH0bKpguJkxiITZqes MxwpSucyDJzXxQEUe/ihgXqJXUXwD9ajB6NHonLmNrUSK9nacHQnH097szO74xFXqtlbT3il wMsBz5cnfCR5cEmci0Rj9u/jqBbPeES1I4PeFBXPUIT1XDSOuutFXylzrQvGyboWstCoQZyP dxX4dLx0eauFe1x9puhoi0Ao1omEJo+BZ6XLVNaVpWiKekxN0VK2VMpmAy+Bk7ZV4SO+p1L/ uErNRS/qH2iFU+iNOtbcmVt9N16lfF7tLv9FXNj8AiyNcOi1AQAA To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 21 14:41:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com [24.0.95.108]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9402637B408 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 14:41:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ATLANTA.threespace.com ([24.21.224.204]) by femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id <20010921214139.JPOS17145.femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com@ATLANTA.threespace.com> for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 14:41:39 -0700 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010921173959.02994178@threespace.com> X-Sender: tech@threespace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 17:41:27 -0400 To: FreeBSD Chat From: Technical Information Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I sent a few messages to FreeBSD Chat on this topic last week and just got them bounced back to me. (I know not why.) I felt passionately about this one in particular, so I decided to resend it. Sorry if it is no longer relevant to current discussions. --Chip Morton At 08:41 PM 9/15/2001, Piet Delport wrote: >[ disclaimer: I'm a South African with no official training in ] >[ socio-politics, aside from what i glean from observation, and ] >[ reading the occasional book and/or other piece of literature. ] >[ So this is mainly an armchair opinion. ] Believe me, after a tragedy of the magnitude that occurred on Tuesday, we're all armchair politicians or generals or analysts or whatever. I have yet to meet the person that has no opinions on the events, so you're certainly no less entitled to your own. >On Sat, 15 Sep 2001 at 04:34:14 -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: > > I'm certain that, had the Germans pointed out a more direct route to > > defeating them, including precisely the targets to concentrate on in > > order to make them lose, the Allies would have been very happy to undo > > the one bolt that held everything together, instead of maniacally > > blasting away with a shotgun. > >So, to paraphrase, it was Germany's fault that the Allies carpet-bombed >their cities, because Germany didn't conveniently point out to their >enemies where all their most important military targets are instead? > >Expecting the country you're at war with to conveniently reveal all >their key military weak spots to you is absurd, and taking the fact that >they (obviously) didn't do so and using it as a moral excuse to carpet >bomb their cities and civilians is just as absurd. I think you missed the point (or at least the sarcasm). If you go and pick a fight with someone that you can't defeat, anyone, you can't expect them to conveniently stop beating on you once you're ready to submit. More likely, their going to beat you until THEY are satisfied that you've been beaten to the point that you've learned your lesson. In the case of WWII, that meant dealing out an ignominious and undeniable defeat to ensure that the threat was eliminated and not just temporarily set back. >The fact is that thousands of civilians died in those bombings, and >while war in general is a Bad Thing, i think the mass-killing of >civilians like that is one of the worst examples of it. > >Whether it's the Allies, the Germans, or even Bin Laden's terrorists >that do the said killing doesn't make it any less wrong. Killing civilians is a terrible thing to do, but if Country A kills the civilians of Country B, then I would think Country B were within it's rights to inflict similar damage/pain upon Country A. An unprovoked attack is one thing, but retribution is an effective form of defense. >[ snipped because the U.S. is not going to abandon its most potent >defensive weapon, regardless of public opinion ] > >Guilt over the past use of nuclear weapons and irrational fear of >civilian nuclear reactors are two entirely separate things. I doubt >*anyone* paying that fee to support the de-commissioning of existing >reactors are thinking about Hiroshima/Nagasaki when they do so. > >Instead, are there any public memorials dedicated to the tragedy, any >public days of mourning, or anything like that which would indicate real >guilt? (This is an honest question, i really haven't the faintest >idea.) Actually there are memorials and remembrances on the dates of the bombings of those two cities. The U.S. government has not only apologized officially to the Japanese government, they've also made formal apology for the detainment of Japanese Americans during the war. And I'll also point you to the fact that our trading stance with Japan over the past twenty-five years has been *extremely* friendly and always in favor of Japan. The fact that Japan now boasts one of the world's strongest economies is not coincidence. I'm not saying that America deserves credit for that, but it certainly is one of the principal factors. > > PS: How profound do you think is the guilt of the perpetrators of the > > September 11th atrocity?. > >Even less than the guilt of Joe Average American over America's own >atrocities, i imagine. I've been hearing a lot of statements like this that seem tossed out for no other reason that to point out that America has made military mistakes in the past. And to be blunt, it makes me bristle. To mention America's past mistakes in this context as if they're some sort of justification for anyone to commit these atrocities is utterly classless and a clear demonstration to me that you don't fully understand the magnitude of what happened. Too many people around the world have expressed support for the U.S. position on this event for me to believe that we're all wrong. --Chip Morton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 21 16:24:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mailsrv.otenet.gr (mailsrv.otenet.gr [195.170.0.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D03B737B409 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 16:24:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hades.hell.gr (patr530-a125.otenet.gr [212.205.215.125]) by mailsrv.otenet.gr (8.11.5/8.11.5) with ESMTP id f8LNOin29023; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 02:24:44 +0300 (EEST) Received: (from charon@localhost) by hades.hell.gr (8.11.6/8.11.6) id f8LNOfM02454; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 02:24:42 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from charon@labs.gr) Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 02:24:41 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Technical Information Cc: FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <20010922022441.A2039@hades.hell.gr> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010921173959.02994178@threespace.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010921173959.02994178@threespace.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i X-GPG-Fingerprint: C1EB 0653 DB8B A557 3829 00F9 D60F 941A 3186 03B6 X-URL: http://labs.gr/~charon/ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Technical Information wrote: > > At 08:41 PM 9/15/2001, Piet Delport wrote: > >[ disclaimer: I'm a South African with no official training in ] > >[ socio-politics, aside from what i glean from observation, and ] > >[ reading the occasional book and/or other piece of literature. ] > >[ So this is mainly an armchair opinion. ] > > Believe me, after a tragedy of the magnitude that occurred on Tuesday, > we're all armchair politicians or generals or analysts or whatever. I have > yet to meet the person that has no opinions on the events, so you're > certainly no less entitled to your own. "Human beings are political by definition." - Aristotle. With an event of such magnitude that affects another `polis' (the ancient Greek world for `city') it takes an apolitical person to not have an opinion. I have yet to find one... -giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 21 18:21:18 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from msg-proxy3.mweb.co.za (msg-proxy3.mweb.co.za [196.2.46.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E454E37B412 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 18:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from siberiyan.dyndns.org ([196.30.183.148]) by msg-proxy3.mweb.co.za (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built May 7 2001)) with SMTP id <0GK1002G2IE06O@msg-proxy3.mweb.co.za> for chat@freebsd.org; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 03:21:08 +0200 (SAST) Received: by siberiyan.dyndns.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 22 Sep 2001 03:20:43 +0200 Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 03:20:42 +0200 From: Piet Delport Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror In-reply-to: <4.3.2.7.2.20010921173959.02994178@threespace.com> To: Technical Information Cc: FreeBSD Chat Mail-Followup-To: Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Message-id: <20010922032042.A29963@athalon> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/signed; boundary="bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.4-STABLE X-Editor: VIM - Vi IMproved 6.0av BETA (http://www.vim.org/) X-Crypto: gpg (GnuPG) 1.0.6 (http://www.gnupg.org/) X-GPG-Key-ID: 0x6B191427 X-GPG-Fingerprint: C7FF A540 2199 F7BF 1933 5640 CD15 0FF3 6B19 1427 References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010921173959.02994178@threespace.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 21 Sep 2001 at 17:41:27 -0400, Technical Information wrote: > I sent a few messages to FreeBSD Chat on this topic last week and just > got them bounced back to me. (I know not why.) I felt passionately > about this one in particular, so I decided to resend it. Sorry if it > is no longer relevant to current discussions. --Chip Morton >=20 >=20 > At 08:41 PM 9/15/2001, Piet Delport wrote: [..] > >> PS: How profound do you think is the guilt of the perpetrators of the > >> September 11th atrocity?. > > > >Even less than the guilt of Joe Average American over America's own > >atrocities, i imagine. >=20 > I've been hearing a lot of statements like this that seem tossed out > for no other reason that to point out that America has made military > mistakes in the past. And to be blunt, it makes me bristle. To > mention America's past mistakes in this context as if they're some > sort of justification for anyone to commit these atrocities is utterly > classless and a clear demonstration to me that you don't fully > understand the magnitude of what happened. My statement does indeed come across much more acidic than i intended; i apologise for that, as it wasn't my intention at all, nor was i trying to use America's mistakes as a justification of the recent events (very far from it, in fact). Terry's posting claimed at length that the American nation was very sorry about its mistakes, whereas the terrorists probably don't feel any remorse at all (unless i completely misinterpret his closing sentence). I was only trying to point out that the Americans don't feel even remotely as soul-struck with guilt as Terry painted them[1], and (obviously) the terrorists feel even less guilt. In fact, arguing merit on the basis of how much guilt one expresses is pointless to begin with IMHO. Once you're involved in a war it's a matter of Us versus Them; you destroy them before they destroy you. Does this make one's actions right or justifiable? No. Does it make them avoidable, and worthy of guilt? No. You do what you have to do. > Too many people around the world have expressed support for the U.S. > position on this event for me to believe that we're all wrong. Actually, i don't think you're wrong at all to want Bin Laden's group (or whoever is responsible) eliminated. The WTC disaster was inexcusable, and i agree emphatically that the organsation responsible for it should be utterly destroyed, as they're a threat to the human race as a whole. Ideally, this should be done as surgically as possible, but unfortunately a lot of people all over the world seem to be calling out for another big, messy war, and i believe that is *not* the way to go about it. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind, as Ghandi said. With all that said, i'd like to add that despite my admittedly trite-sounding opinion on how America should try to handle this, i realise that the situation is much more messy and complex than that in reality. I'd hate to have to make the decisions that the American leaders are currently having to make, and my deepest respect will go to them if they can actually figure out how to defuse the current situation, without more needless bloodshed. [1] And why should they? It's done and over with, and besides, America has made more amends than anyone could rightly expect them to, as you and others have pointed out. --=20 Piet Delport Today's subliminal thought is: --bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE7q+dqzRUP82sZFCcRAhduAJ4jR3pZeXsesEAfzRhpnBsZ83Sa/QCfeHwn ltS9q3Ba/rZslsv9Mv2x238= =ZMZ0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --bp/iNruPH9dso1Pn-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 21 22:34: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from server1.lordlegacy.org (lordlegacy.org [209.61.182.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9553037B411 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 22:34:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sharon ([216.13.207.127]) by server1.lordlegacy.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA28235; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 19:45:56 -0500 From: "Stephen Hurd" To: "Technical Information" , "FreeBSD Chat" Subject: RE: Helping victims of terror Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:45:05 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <4.3.2.7.2.20010921173959.02994178@threespace.com> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Believe me, after a tragedy of the magnitude that occurred on Tuesday, > we're all armchair politicians or generals or analysts or whatever. I have > yet to meet the person that has no opinions on the events, so you're > certainly no less entitled to your own. /me leans over his armchair to grab his pipe, stokes it up nicely and proceeds... :-) > Killing civilians is a terrible thing to do, but if Country A kills the > civilians of Country B, then I would think Country B were within it's > rights to inflict similar damage/pain upon Country A. An unprovoked attack > is one thing, but retribution is an effective form of defense. In my mind, the most important bit of this is that in this case, Country A hasn't DONE anything. Afghanistan has NOT attacked the United States yet the United States wants retribution against Afghanistan because there is a person there who has been grated asylum that the US government THINKS organised the attack. If the US granted asylum to someone say (totally random example) from the IRA, and the British said "Hand him over, or we'll bomb the hell out of you. You're harbouring him, so that makes you responsible for all he has done... including this stuff that we don't have any hard evidence that he actually did." the entire US public would be outraged, refuse to hand the refugee over and quite possibly be happy to go to war over it KNOWING they were right. Yet this is the position that the US has put the Afghanistan government into. They have not offered convincing evidence that Bin Ladden is responsible for this attack. With the evidence that has been made public, they would NOT get a conviction in a court of law. Doubtless they know something we don't, but the entire US piblic is going along with this WITHOUT being offered the proof. So now the United States uses terrorist tactics itself "We want Bin Ladden or we will start killing people who have had no part of the attack, did not condone the attack, and have publicly expressed their outrage at the attack... and keep it up until you hand him over." This sounds a lot like the traditional hostage situation... only now, the United States is holding an ENTIRE COUNTRY hostage. That is the bit that scares me. If the United States said "We are going to hunt all terrorists down no matter where they hide - that's why we have special forces and are justifiably pround of our ability to effect pinpoint strikes with massive firepower." I would be about 87% behind them. That's not what they're saying though. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 21 23:28: 9 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5445A37B412 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dialup-209.245.141.15.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net ([209.245.141.15] helo=mindspring.com) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.32 #2) id 15kgGb-0004Mc-00; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:27:58 -0700 Message-ID: <3BAC2F9A.9DEE0775@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:28:42 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Piet Delport Cc: Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010921173959.02994178@threespace.com> <20010922032042.A29963@athalon> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Piet Delport wrote: > Terry's posting claimed at length that the American nation was very > sorry about its mistakes, whereas the terrorists probably don't feel any > remorse at all (unless i completely misinterpret his closing sentence). > > I was only trying to point out that the Americans don't feel even > remotely as soul-struck with guilt as Terry painted them[1], and > (obviously) the terrorists feel even less guilt. Do not confuse "guilt" with "remorse". Many in the U.S. feel remorse over the actions we have been collectively forced to take in the past. This does not mean that we would not do the same thing again, were the circumstances identical. If this turns into a 10 year war, as some have predicted, I suspect we will see a U.S. willing to act far more terribly than anything any nation has done in the past in defense of its continued existance. If this happens, the people of the U.S. will feel remorse, but only a few will feel true guilt (as Oppenheimer felt guilt over the atomic bomb). There is such a thing as necessary violence in defense of oneself, when faced by a violent and implacable foe. > In fact, arguing merit on the basis of how much guilt one expresses is > pointless to begin with IMHO. Once you're involved in a war it's a > matter of Us versus Them; you destroy them before they destroy you. > Does this make one's actions right or justifiable? No. Does it make > them avoidable, and worthy of guilt? No. You do what you have to do. The U.S. has not engaged in the doctorine of "total war" for a very long time now -- it has been since before the U.S. signed the Geneva Convention. Even in times of war, the U.S. has not discarded what can only be called "gentlemanly rules of conduct". > Actually, i don't think you're wrong at all to want Bin Laden's group > (or whoever is responsible) eliminated. The WTC disaster was > inexcusable, and i agree emphatically that the organsation responsible > for it should be utterly destroyed, as they're a threat to the human > race as a whole. > > Ideally, this should be done as surgically as possible, but > unfortunately a lot of people all over the world seem to be calling out > for another big, messy war, and i believe that is *not* the way to go > about it. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind, as Ghandi > said. I don't think that anyone wants a messy war, except perhaps the terrorists responsible for the act. But as you point out, the responsible organization must be neutralized, if we are to avoid future repetitions, either in the U.S. or elsewhere. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Sep 21 23:56:37 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578E337B41A for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:56:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dialup-209.245.141.15.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net ([209.245.141.15] helo=mindspring.com) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.32 #2) id 15kgi6-0001vn-00; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:56:22 -0700 Message-ID: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 23:57:08 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Hurd Cc: Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Stephen Hurd wrote: > In my mind, the most important bit of this is that in this case, Country A > hasn't DONE anything. Afghanistan has NOT attacked the United States yet the > United States wants retribution against Afghanistan because there is a person > there who has been grated asylum that the US government THINKS organised the > attack. You must no be seeing the same statements from the Taliban that I've been seeing. They want Osama bin Laden tried by a court of religious leaders, chosen from similar radical members of a sect of an otherwise peaceful religion. We are then supposed to trust that these people -- who have stated similar opinions of the U.S. as "The Great Satan", and expressed a desire for its destruction at every available opportunity -- will come to a fair, impartial decision. > If the US granted asylum to someone say (totally random example) from > the IRA, and the British said "Hand him over, or we'll bomb the hell > out of you. You're harbouring him, so that makes you responsible for > all he has done... You'll have to pick a different example; the U.S. and the U.K. have extradition treaties which would preclude this happening; it was, in fact, these treaties which allowed the U.S. to take custody of the Osama bin Laden sponsored terrorist responsible for the bombing of the Pan Am jetliner over Lacherby Scotland, and who was scheduled to be sentenced in U.S. courts September 12th -- the day after the attack on the U.S.. > including this stuff that we don't have any hard evidence that > he actually did." This is idiotic. We have proof, which we have shared with our allies. We would be incredibly stupid to compromise both our intelligence assets, as well as disclosing our reconissance capabilities, to people who have shown themselves to be our enimies by killing our civilians. > the entire US public would be outraged, refuse to hand the > refugee over and quite possibly be happy to go to war over it > KNOWING they were right. Yet this is the position that the US > has put the Afghanistan government into. This would be the same government who dynamited some of the largest and oldest Buddist statues in the world a month or so ago, in an extreme demonstration of religious intolerance, and an attempt to rewrite the history of their country. This would be the same government which just assasinated their major opposition leader via the auspices of a terrorist suicide bomber, a short week before the attack on the U.S.. This would be the same government which has permitted Osama bin Laden to operate his international terrorist organization unchecked from within their borders, turning a blind eye to his activities, such as the bombing of civilian airliners in Scotland, U.S. embassies in Nigeria and other African countries, and the recent attempt to sink the U.S.S. Cole. Right? > They have not offered convincing evidence that Bin Ladden is > responsible for this attack. With the evidence that has been > made public, they would NOT get a conviction in a court of law. > Doubtless they know something we don't, but the entire US piblic > is going along with this WITHOUT being offered the proof. I'd be perfectly happy with a grand jury and sealed testimony, which would not compromise U.S. Intelligence assets. If Osama bin Laden would be so kind as to turn himself in to the world court, I'm sure that the information would be presented in the case against him, under sealed testimony. > So now the United States uses terrorist tactics itself "We want > Bin Ladden or we will start killing people who have had no part > of the attack, did not condone the attack, and have publicly > expressed their outrage at the attack... and keep it up until > you hand him over." They "publically expressed outrage"? Was this before or after they stated that a religious court should judge him, and we should accept the outcome, if the activist zealots of the same stripe as Osama bin Laden found in his favor? > This sounds a lot like the traditional hostage situation... only > now, the United States is holding an ENTIRE COUNTRY hostage. This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. The U.S. is in no way acting as terrorists: terrorists bomb first, and claim credit afterwards -- assuming that they don't say to themselves "Oh shit... I've stepped in it this time...". > That is the bit that scares me. If the United States said "We are > going to hunt all terrorists down no matter where they hide - that's > why we have special forces and are justifiably pround of our ability > to effect pinpoint strikes with massive firepower." I would be about > 87% behind them. That's not what they're saying though. Pinpoint strikes are not effective at avoiding civilian casualties, when you are fighting against people who hide behind civilians. The best chance at avoiding collateral damage would be if they were willing to excise the cancer themselves, rather than forcing the U.S. to go hunting for it. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 1:20:56 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from server1.lordlegacy.org (lordlegacy.org [209.61.182.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3154E37B40C for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 01:20:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sharon ([216.13.207.127]) by server1.lordlegacy.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA28698; Fri, 21 Sep 2001 22:32:47 -0500 From: "Stephen Hurd" To: , "Stephen Hurd" Cc: "Technical Information" , "FreeBSD Chat" Subject: RE: Helping victims of terror Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 02:30:10 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > You must no be seeing the same statements from the Taliban that > I've been seeing. They want Osama bin Laden tried by a court > of religious leaders, chosen from similar radical members of a > sect of an otherwise peaceful religion. We are then supposed > to trust that these people -- who have stated similar opinions > of the U.S. as "The Great Satan", and expressed a desire for > its destruction at every available opportunity -- will come to > a fair, impartial decision. Jury of their peers... sorry to slap that one in there, I actually HAVE been seeing similar statements, but are they any more likely to come to a fair, impartial decision as a jusy chosen from a country that has been screming for his blood for the last few years? > > If the US granted asylum to someone say (totally random example) from > > the IRA, and the British said "Hand him over, or we'll bomb the hell > > out of you. You're harbouring him, so that makes you responsible for > > all he has done... > > You'll have to pick a different example; the U.S. and the U.K. > have extradition treaties which would preclude this happening; > it was, in fact, these treaties which allowed the U.S. to take > custody of the Osama bin Laden sponsored terrorist responsible > for the bombing of the Pan Am jetliner over Lacherby Scotland, > and who was scheduled to be sentenced in U.S. courts September > 12th -- the day after the attack on the U.S.. I won't have to pick a different example, extradition is often fought and sometimes not granted. The extradition treaties don't flat out guarantee that the person will be extridited. One of the resons for not extriditing is a lack of evidence, or (essentially) if the offense is not considered an offense by the country granting refuge... I seem to remember somebody being not extridited because he was sentenced to be caned... > > including this stuff that we don't have any hard evidence that > > he actually did." > > This is idiotic. We have proof, which we have shared with our > allies. We would be incredibly stupid to compromise both our > intelligence assets, as well as disclosing our reconissance > capabilities, to people who have shown themselves to be our > enimies by killing our civilians. Who has proof? Have you seen it? I haven't. Until they make it public, or even say that they have it, they are proceeding without proof. > > the entire US public would be outraged, refuse to hand the > > refugee over and quite possibly be happy to go to war over it > > KNOWING they were right. Yet this is the position that the US > > has put the Afghanistan government into. > > This would be the same government who dynamited some of the > largest and oldest Buddist statues in the world a month or > so ago, in an extreme demonstration of religious intolerance, > and an attempt to rewrite the history of their country. This > would be the same government which just assasinated their major > opposition leader via the auspices of a terrorist suicide bomber, > a short week before the attack on the U.S.. This would be the > same government which has permitted Osama bin Laden to operate > his international terrorist organization unchecked from within > their borders, turning a blind eye to his activities, such as > the bombing of civilian airliners in Scotland, U.S. embassies > in Nigeria and other African countries, and the recent attempt > to sink the U.S.S. Cole. Right? Proof of the suicide bomber being sent by the government? I'm not aware of any. I haven't looked into this though. As for the "blind eye" I'll have to dig up a bit more information... but the government seems to believe that they have cut off all of Bin Ladens communitaction with the outside world (I don't believe this, but they do - or say they do) in the US, that is not done even to prisoners on death row. > > They have not offered convincing evidence that Bin Ladden is > > responsible for this attack. With the evidence that has been > > made public, they would NOT get a conviction in a court of law. > > Doubtless they know something we don't, but the entire US piblic > > is going along with this WITHOUT being offered the proof. > > I'd be perfectly happy with a grand jury and sealed testimony, > which would not compromise U.S. Intelligence assets. If Osama > bin Laden would be so kind as to turn himself in to the world > court, I'm sure that the information would be presented in the > case against him, under sealed testimony. I would be perfectly happy with generalizations and data that would not compromise U.S. Intelligence assests. If the head of the CIA comes out and says "A source in Bin Ladens camp has been told by someone close to Bin Laden that Bin Laden did in fact organise the attack" I don't think that would compromise anyone or anything. But they don't say that. What Rumsfeld says is: "... what we do know is that this is not a problem of al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. It is a problem of a number of networks of terrorists that have been active across the globe, and it is something that strikes at the very heart of what Americans are, which is free people. " What it boils down to is "Afghanistan is first" I've spend the last hour looking for any press statement even saying that the government posses proof that bin laden was responsible... I couldn't find a single one. Now I don't think "We posess proof that it was bin laden... no further comment" would compromise any U.S. Intelligence assets, or any others countries assets either. > > So now the United States uses terrorist tactics itself "We want > > Bin Ladden or we will start killing people who have had no part > > of the attack, did not condone the attack, and have publicly > > expressed their outrage at the attack... and keep it up until > > you hand him over." > > They "publically expressed outrage"? Was this before or after > they stated that a religious court should judge him, and we > should accept the outcome, if the activist zealots of the same > stripe as Osama bin Laden found in his favor? It was before. And after the US said they would not differentiate between the terrorists themselves and the countries that harboured them and after it was apparent that they were convinced that bin laden was responsible. > > This sounds a lot like the traditional hostage situation... only > > now, the United States is holding an ENTIRE COUNTRY hostage. > > This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. The U.S. > is in no way acting as terrorists: terrorists bomb first, and > claim credit afterwards -- assuming that they don't say to > themselves "Oh shit... I've stepped in it this time...". In hostage situations, terrorists get the hostages into a position where they can be killed from, then demand that their demands be met or they will kill the hostages. They do NOT kill the hostages first, they make demands first such as "hand the following 10 prisoners over to us" A quote from President Bush -- WASHINGTON, Sept. 21, 2001 "Deliver to United States authorities all the leaders of Al Qaeda who hide in your land ... Close immediately and permanently every terrorist training camp in Afghanistan, and hand over every terrorist, and every person in their support structure, to appropriate authorities ... These demands are not open to negotiation or discussion, The Taliban must act, and act immediately. They will hand over the terrorists, or they will share in their fate." --- end quote If Afghanistan refuses to capture bin laden and hand him over, that is the (stupid analogy bit) equivelant of ordering a landlord to go in and arrest a murderer on threat of death when there is a swat team sitting outside with the house surrounded. I feel that these are unreasonable demands... the the Afghanistan government does not have the resources to implement them. And they are being threatened with their very lives if they do not. > > That is the bit that scares me. If the United States said "We are > > going to hunt all terrorists down no matter where they hide - that's > > why we have special forces and are justifiably pround of our ability > > to effect pinpoint strikes with massive firepower." I would be about > > 87% behind them. That's not what they're saying though. > > Pinpoint strikes are not effective at avoiding civilian > casualties, when you are fighting against people who hide > behind civilians. The best chance at avoiding collateral > damage would be if they were willing to excise the cancer > themselves, rather than forcing the U.S. to go hunting for it. I'm not saying there must be no civilian casualties. That is, always has been, and probobly always will be flat out impossible in most situations. I'm saying take the war to the terrorists who perpetrated the crime, not the people who run the country in which they live. That would still result in a war with Afghanistan. 1) The US starts bombing terrorist camps in Afghanistan 2) The US sends in special units to kill or capture all known terrorists in Afghanistan 3) Afghanistan, responding to the US troops invading their country attack the special units. 4) Afghanistan declares was in the US and vice-versa. It's the REASON to go to war with Afghanistan not the war itself that I take exception to. If Afghanistan does NOT attack the US troops, they are then NOT protecting bin laden and his troops. With their army and their internal problems, I would be hesitant to try to go in, capture bin laden, and hand him over to the United States government. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 3:56:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from jake.akitanet.co.uk (jake.akitanet.co.uk [212.1.130.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40A4C37B408 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 03:56:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dsl-212-135-208-201.dsl.easynet.co.uk ([212.135.208.201] helo=wopr.akitanet.co.uk) by jake.akitanet.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #3) id 15kkS8-0008sI-00; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 11:56:08 +0100 Received: from wiggy by wopr.akitanet.co.uk with local (Exim 3.21 #2) id 15kkSJ-000FXI-00; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 11:56:19 +0100 Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 11:56:19 +0100 From: Paul Robinson To: Stephen Hurd Cc: Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <20010922115619.B55559@jake.akitanet.co.uk> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010921173959.02994178@threespace.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from deuce@lordlegacy.org on Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 11:45:05PM -0600 X-Scanner: exiscan *15kkS8-0008sI-00*$AK$LHG47SWDG2yUgnn2gNd8k.* Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sep 22, Stephen Hurd wrote: > In my mind, the most important bit of this is that in this case, Country A > hasn't DONE anything. Afghanistan has NOT attacked the United States yet the > United States wants retribution against Afghanistan because there is a person > there who has been grated asylum that the US government THINKS organised the > attack. And there is an important side note here, with regards to the Taliban. The Taliban have now publically stated that if the US are able to prove that Laden was responsible, they will hand him over. The problem is that it will be almost impossible to prove he was responsible without the ability to cross-examine him, or carry out an investigation in Afghanistan with the Taliban's approval. > If the US granted asylum to someone say (totally random example) from the IRA, > and the British said "Hand him over, or we'll bomb the hell out of you. > You're harbouring him, so that makes you responsible for all he has done... > including this stuff that we don't have any hard evidence that he actually > did." the entire US public would be outraged, refuse to hand the refugee over > and quite possibly be happy to go to war over it KNOWING they were right. Yet That's OK. We are used to the US senate and large sections of the US public giving support to an organisation that are responsible for around 5,000 deaths in our country over the last 30 years. Fortunately, it now looks like the NI problem is starting to get resolved, and it's probably not worth dragging that one in here. However, I suspect that Sinn Fein's next money-raising campaign in the US to buy guns (if they have another one) probably won't be as successful as the previous President-sponsored events. :-) > this is the position that the US has put the Afghanistan government into. > They have not offered convincing evidence that Bin Ladden is responsible for > this attack. With the evidence that has been made public, they would NOT get > a conviction in a court of law. Doubtless they know something we don't, but > the entire US piblic is going along with this WITHOUT being offered the proof. Actually, the parallels to NI are getting stronger here. It would be reasonable to assume that the British government know who the full membership of the IRA is, and who is responsible for the majority of terrorist activity over the last 30 years. However, none of it would stand up in court and the detection methods used would have to be disclosed - not something that they might want to happen. I can see the exact same problem in the US. > That is the bit that scares me. If the United States said "We are going to > hunt all terrorists down no matter where they hide - that's why we have > special forces and are justifiably pround of our ability to effect pinpoint > strikes with massive firepower." I would be about 87% behind them. That's not > what they're saying though. Make it known. From what I've heard it's only the right wing who are supporting the current position. Lines like "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists" might scare the hell out of me (a wimpy English liberal) but the question is to how many members of the US population don't like th current plan, and more importantly, how many are prepared to make that fact known. I suspect CNN aren't really interested in talking to people like that, as they increasingly seem to be Bush's mouthpiece. This might be over the top, but this is all starting to get a little 1930's for my taste... some of the tactics being used by Bush to justify himself are definitely ones that wiff a little of those used by the man whose name I shall merely abbreviate as 'H'. Like I say, over the top, but it is all starting to feel rather surreal. -- PR To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 4:18:23 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from jake.akitanet.co.uk (jake.akitanet.co.uk [212.1.130.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72E9837B621 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 04:18:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dsl-212-135-208-201.dsl.easynet.co.uk ([212.135.208.201] helo=wopr.akitanet.co.uk) by jake.akitanet.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #3) id 15kknE-0008wC-00; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:17:56 +0100 Received: from wiggy by wopr.akitanet.co.uk with local (Exim 3.21 #2) id 15kknP-000FYC-00; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:18:07 +0100 Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:18:07 +0100 From: Paul Robinson To: Stephen Hurd Cc: tlambert2@mindspring.com, Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <20010922121807.C55559@jake.akitanet.co.uk> References: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from deuce@lordlegacy.org on Sat, Sep 22, 2001 at 02:30:10AM -0600 X-Scanner: exiscan *15kknE-0008wC-00*$AK$LRn46rWvaCHTaN1.uwvOD.* Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sep 22, Stephen Hurd wrote: > Jury of their peers... sorry to slap that one in there, I actually HAVE been > seeing similar statements, but are they any more likely to come to a fair, > impartial decision as a jusy chosen from a country that has been screming for > his blood for the last few years? An agrument used by various Nazi war criminals over the years. In that case, the only people who would qualify to be judge and jury would be the Swiss who historically are on everybody's side at the same time whilst maintaining they aren't on anybody's side. The US really wouldn't like a country where all motor sport is illegal and every male adult is a member of the army (sounds almost Taliban-ish), to take over the running of this though. :-) > > You'll have to pick a different example; the U.S. and the U.K. > > have extradition treaties which would preclude this happening; The UK pleaded that certain (for here, unnamed) individuals shouls not be permitted into the US to raise funds to buy weaponry, but the US made sure that the entry visas got the President's very own approval. I see what you're saying though. > > it was, in fact, these treaties which allowed the U.S. to take > > custody of the Osama bin Laden sponsored terrorist responsible > > for the bombing of the Pan Am jetliner over Lacherby Scotland, Sorry, this might seem like nit-picking but that should be 'Lockerbie' > I would be perfectly happy with generalizations and data that would not > compromise U.S. Intelligence assests. If the head of the CIA comes out and > says "A source in Bin Ladens camp has been told by someone close to Bin Laden > that Bin Laden did in fact organise the attack" I don't think that would > compromise anyone or anything. But they don't say that. What Rumsfeld says > is: That would compromise the US' source, and he would most likely be killed very quickly. > What it boils down to is "Afghanistan is first" I've spend the last hour > looking for any press statement even saying that the government posses proof > that bin laden was responsible... I couldn't find a single one. Now I don't > think "We posess proof that it was bin laden... no further comment" would > compromise any U.S. Intelligence assets, or any others countries assets > either. It would actually. It compromises lots of detection methods, individuals and at the end of the day, if they said "we have proof but we're not telling you what it is" you either wouldn't believe them or would want the proof made public - i.e. your next question would be 'prove you have proof'. That causes problems. > If Afghanistan does NOT attack the US troops, they are then NOT protecting bin > laden and his troops. With their army and their internal problems, I would be > hesitant to try to go in, capture bin laden, and hand him over to the United > States government. If you saw a bunch of special commandos heading into your town, and you know their job is to kill you, do you not think you might want to at least defend yourself? -- Paul Robinson ,--------------------------------------- Technical Director @ Akita | A computer lets you make more mistakes PO Box 604, Manchester, M60 3PR | than any other invention with the T: +44 (0) 161 228 6388 (F:6389)| possible exceptions of handguns and | Tequila - Mitch Ratcliffe `----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 4:56:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mailgate.originative.co.uk (mailgate.originative.co.uk [62.232.68.68]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CE7A37B412 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 04:56:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lobster.originative.co.uk (lobster [62.232.68.81]) by mailgate.originative.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A9961D162; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:56:42 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:56:42 +0100 From: Paul Richards To: tlambert2@mindspring.com, Stephen Hurd Cc: Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <948140000.1001159802@lobster.originative.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> References: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --On Friday, September 21, 2001 23:57:08 -0700 Terry Lambert wrote: > You'll have to pick a different example; the U.S. and the U.K. > have extradition treaties which would preclude this happening; > it was, in fact, these treaties which allowed the U.S. to take > custody of the Osama bin Laden sponsored terrorist responsible > for the bombing of the Pan Am jetliner over Lacherby Scotland, > and who was scheduled to be sentenced in U.S. courts September > 12th -- the day after the attack on the U.S.. The two people tried for the Locherbie bombing were Libyan. It took ten years to harbour a deal with Libya to hand them over and last year they were tried in Holland under a complex arrangement where the court was actually Scottish. I think only one them was convicted in the end and that is currently being appealed. The two suspects were part of Libya's secret service and there has been no mention of any involvement of Bin Laden. >> the entire US public would be outraged, refuse to hand the >> refugee over and quite possibly be happy to go to war over it >> KNOWING they were right. Yet this is the position that the US >> has put the Afghanistan government into. > > This would be the same government who dynamited some of the > largest and oldest Buddhist statues in the world a month or > so ago, in an extreme demonstration of religious intolerance, > and an attempt to rewrite the history of their country. This > would be the same government which just assassinated their major > opposition leader via the auspices of a terrorist suicide bomber, > a short week before the attack on the U.S.. This would be the > same government which has permitted Osama bin Laden to operate > his international terrorist organization unchecked from within > their borders, turning a blind eye to his activities, such as > the bombing of civilian airliners in Scotland, U.S. embassies > in Nigeria and other African countries, and the recent attempt > to sink the U.S.S. Cole. Right? There are many statements in the above paragraph, they need separating out. Destroying Buddhist statues may outrage us but it is not a crime that justifies a war. The British destroyed or defaced many Egyptian artifacts because they were obscene by Victorian standards. The Spanish destroyed many artifacts in South America. The US have destroyed many native American artifacts in the past. The west has only recently seen the need to value ancient artifacts for scientific and historic purposes and has only recently overcome its own religious fanaticism in destroying "blasphemous" objects of other cultures. Afghanistan may, in our opinion, be behind us in that respect, but it is not an acceptable excuse for a war. You are showing a prejudice against a people that you do not have respect for because of their beliefs and actions. In your mind that makes it acceptable to carry out actions that you would find abhorrent if carried out against a nation you did respect. Harbouring terrorists is the other main issue. The Irish govt. had terrorists based within its borders for the whole time of the conflicts there (and it's not completely resolved yet). What the US is planning with respect to Afghanistan is akin to the UK waging war against Ireland for harbouring terrorists that were bombing London. This is not a war; a small number of individuals have committed a heinous crime and they should be tracked down and brought to justice. That is a far cry from invading a foreign power for not doing as they're told. From Afghanistan's perspective, they are not attempting to hide Bin Laden, they've made a diplomatically astute statement, that clearly shows, at least in my mind, that they do not want to fight this battle and that if the US wants him they can have him. However, the Taliban would be committing political suicide to do the US' dirty work. The social environment in that part of the world is such that most of the population hates the US and would rise up and overthrow a regime that supported it. This is a real danger for the Pakistan govt. who are seeing large demonstrations on its streets already. > They "publically expressed outrage"? Was this before or after > they stated that a religious court should judge him, and we > should accept the outcome, if the activist zealots of the same > stripe as Osama bin Laden found in his favor? Umm, the last statement I heard was that they would not hand him over, but requested that he leave their territory. That's not showing support for him, that's turning their back on him, but that's as strong a statement as they can make publically given their own internal political situation. They did publically express outrage in fact; the very first public statement they made was to express sympathy for the US. >> This sounds a lot like the traditional hostage situation... only >> now, the United States is holding an ENTIRE COUNTRY hostage. > > This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. The U.S. > is in no way acting as terrorists: terrorists bomb first, and > claim credit afterwards -- assuming that they don't say to > themselves "Oh shit... I've stepped in it this time...". The IRA generally issued warnings before bombings so that casualties were minimised. Though they still killed plenty of innocent people it could have been a lot higher. The US approach isn't that different and the IRA would definitely be considered to be terrorists. While on the subject of the IRA, a lot of the finance came from the US, so if you accept the current US thinking then the UK should have invaded the US for aiding and abetting the IRA over all those years. The US, until Clinton got involved, turned a blind eye to the Irish situation because a lot of US Irish were sympathisers. That was apparently an "acceptable" struggle being waged. Terrorism is not some black or white issue. It's a manifestation of underlying politics. It's hypocritical of the US to wage war on terrorism at this point given that it has participated and supported it in the past, as long as it wasn't on their doorstep. Did the US express outrage and decide to wage a war on terrorism when the IRA blew up the hotel that the UK govt were staying in at the time, or when they killed a member of our royal family, or when they carried out a mortar attack on the MI5 HQ? Did the UK decide to wage war on innocent countries when faced with such provocation? There needs to be a reasoned response to this attack, and declaring war on countries because some of their residents are suspected of being involved is not a reasonable response. It's more a symptom of the foreign policy the US has had for many years which led to the terrorist attack in the first place. i.e. do what we want or we will send the boys around. Incidentally, the support in the west for US action is flimsy. The EU was very guarded in it's support yesterday. While the UK may be gung ho about supporting the US that is not reflected across the whole of Europe. No-one is going to stand up and not support US action, but there's growing feeling that the US will not be given open-ended support to do whatever it wishes. There are many countries on the fringes of the EU that will be very worried about US retaliation, countries like Turkey for example. Paul Richards To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 7:50:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E39E37B405 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 07:50:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA85077; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 16:50:17 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: tlambert2@mindspring.com Cc: Stephen Hurd , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 22 Sep 2001 16:50:16 +0200 In-Reply-To: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> Message-ID: Lines: 60 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert writes: > You'll have to pick a different example; the U.S. and the U.K. > have extradition treaties which would preclude this happening; > it was, in fact, these treaties which allowed the U.S. to take > custody of the Osama bin Laden sponsored terrorist responsible > for the bombing of the Pan Am jetliner over Lacherby Scotland, Please, it's spelled "Lockerbie". > > including this stuff that we don't have any hard evidence that > > he actually did." > This is idiotic. We have proof, which we have shared with our > allies. No. You have circumstantial evidence, consisting of clues which are so outrageously, stupidly obvious that a significant portion of us non-americans are speculating that it may, quite frankly, have been fabricated in a hurry on the evening of September 11th. Meanwhile, you seem to be ignoring equally strong circumstantial evidence pointing towards Iraq, which would exonerate Usama bin Laden - but that would force W to admit to a mistake, maybe even apologize to the Taliban, which would not look good on CNN at all. I'd suggest you take a trip to your local Blockbuster and rent "Wag the Dog", and, if you can get hold of it, "The Second Civil War" (it was made-for-TV, so I'm not sure you can get it on video). > I'd be perfectly happy with a grand jury and sealed testimony, > which would not compromise U.S. Intelligence assets. If Osama > bin Laden would be so kind as to turn himself in to the world > court, I'm sure that the information would be presented in the > case against him, under sealed testimony. In other words, an unchallengeable witch trial. I'm not saying the guy's a saint, but in this particular instance you may be barking up the wrong tree. > They "publically expressed outrage"? Was this before or after > they stated that a religious court should judge him, and we > should accept the outcome, if the activist zealots of the same > stripe as Osama bin Laden found in his favor? Before - and also before the US responded to their public expression of outrage and sympathy with what can be summed up as "we're going to turn your country into the world's largest parking lot". > > This sounds a lot like the traditional hostage situation... only > > now, the United States is holding an ENTIRE COUNTRY hostage. > This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. The U.S. > is in no way acting as terrorists: terrorists bomb first, and > claim credit afterwards -- assuming that they don't say to > themselves "Oh shit... I've stepped in it this time...". Oh? You need to read up on modern history (particularly European history from the 1960s and on, with emphasis on France, Germany and Italy). DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 10:19:19 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ghost2.onet.pl (ghost2.onet.pl [213.180.128.23]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C056437B422 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 10:19:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [157.25.130.16] ([157.25.130.16]:14584 "HELO poczta.onet.pl") by ghost2.onet.pl with SMTP id ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 19:18:36 +0200 From: "Petition" To: "freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.org" Subject: Petiton against war. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 19:20:40 +0200 Reply-To: "Petition" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <20010922171836Z602656-5244+3269@ghost2.onet.pl> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Please sign The Petition at http://home.uchicago.edu/~dhpicker/petition which appeals to world leaders to be level-headed and, wherever possible, peaceful in their response to the recent attack against the United States. PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. The signatures logged by the website above will be forwarded to leaders around the world. It is imperative that we act quickly to save lifes. Soldeirs average is not 50 but 22 years....World leaders average is 60. Sylvain. Check too: http://www.euronewspaper.de

Wygraj 2 dni extra dostepu do Big Brother
nie daj sie innym wyprzedzic [ http://bigbrother.onet.pl/platnosci_info.html ]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 11: 5:56 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail12.speakeasy.net (mail12.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.212]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBCBC37B41F for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 11:05:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 24158 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2001 18:05:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mgm) ([216.27.148.137]) (envelope-sender ) by mail12.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 22 Sep 2001 18:05:46 -0000 Message-ID: <004b01c14391$458445e0$89941bd8@speakeasy.net> Reply-To: "jason" From: "jason" To: "Petition" , "freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.org" References: <20010922171836Z602656-5244+3269@ghost2.onet.pl> Subject: Re: Petiton against war. Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 14:06:14 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0048_01C1436F.BDCACD20" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0048_01C1436F.BDCACD20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I take serious issue with anyone who wants to petition the one thing = that may end Terrorism around the world once and for all. We were brutally attacked on 9/11/01 by terrorists. This will continue = if the only response to such attacks is short retaliations. As a 6 year veteran of the US Army I believe that in order to stop this = army of Terrorists we must put them on the defensive. We must remove = from power any government that sanctions, supports, or finds the = activities of these groups. All of this should be down with the minimal = involvement of innocent civilians. This is war should be found to the = fullest extent and include only military, government and other = associated parties. It is true that the average age of a soldier is 22. But ever single = member of the armed forces in the US have 100% volunteered for the job = and know full well that a war could mean their death. Each of them = decided that the risk of life and war was a small price to pay for the = very freedom we all so enjoy here. I salute any who take the on the = responsibility and risk to defend this country. Maybe you should ask a = few of these 22 year old soldiers before you just assume they need to be = saved from their jobs!!! Anyone who states we should not go to war after such an attack and with = the history of terrorist attacks against the US and its allies is not = true patriot but rather a coward not worth of the freedoms provided by = this country. By asking the US not to go to war that individual is in = fact taking the position of the leader of Iraq who was the first public = official to make that very same statement. I apologize for this message as I know it is not in the topic of this = group. But in reading the message I Was deeply offended by the author = and felt overwhelming need to respond. Further discussion should be = handled in more appropriate forum or privately. Thanks Jason Cribbins MGM Communications LLC US Army 1989-1996 2-7 CAV, 1CD 3BDE, 1CD 2MP, 2ID 4-38 FA, 123RD ARCOM ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Petition=20 To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.org=20 Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2001 1:20 PM Subject: Petiton against war. Please sign The Petition at = http://home.uchicago.edu/~dhpicker/petition which appeals to world = leaders to be level-headed and, wherever possible, peaceful in their = response to the recent attack against the United States. PLEASE FORWARD = THIS MESSAGE TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. The = signatures logged by the website above will be forwarded to leaders = around the world. It is imperative that we act quickly to save lifes. = Soldeirs average is not 50 but 22 years....World leaders average is 60. = Sylvain. Check too: http://www.euronewspaper.de=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Wygraj 2 dni extra dostepu do Big Brother nie daj sie innym wyprzedzic [ = http://bigbrother.onet.pl/platnosci_info.html ]=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe = freebsd-chat" in the body of the message ------=_NextPart_000_0048_01C1436F.BDCACD20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I take serious issue with anyone who = wants to=20 petition the one thing that may end Terrorism around the world once and = for=20 all.
 
We were brutally attacked on 9/11/01 by = terrorists.  This will continue if the only response to such = attacks is=20 short retaliations.
 
As a 6 year veteran of the US Army I = believe that=20 in order to stop this army of Terrorists we must put them on the=20 defensive.  We must remove from power any government that = sanctions,=20 supports, or finds the activities of these groups.  All of = this should=20 be down with the minimal involvement of innocent civilians.  This = is war=20 should be found to the fullest extent and include only military, = government and=20 other associated parties.
 
It is true that the average age of a = soldier is=20 22.  But ever single member of the armed forces in the US have 100% = volunteered for the job and know full well that a war could mean their=20 death.  Each of them decided that the risk of life and war was a = small=20 price to pay for the very freedom we all so enjoy here.  I salute = any who=20 take the on the responsibility and risk to defend this = country.  Maybe=20 you should ask a few of these 22 year old soldiers before you just = assume=20 they need to be saved from their jobs!!!
 
Anyone who states we should not go to = war after=20 such an attack and with the history of terrorist attacks against the US = and its=20 allies is not true patriot but rather a coward not worth of the = freedoms=20 provided by this country. By asking the US not to go to war that = individual=20 is in fact taking the position of the leader of Iraq who was the first = public=20 official to make that very same statement.
 
I apologize for this message as I know = it is not in=20 the topic of this group.  But in reading the message I Was deeply = offended=20 by the author and felt overwhelming need to respond.  Further = discussion=20 should be handled in more appropriate forum or privately.
 
Thanks
Jason Cribbins
MGM Communications LLC
US Army 1989-1996
2-7 CAV, 1CD
3BDE, 1CD
2MP, 2ID
4-38 FA, 123RD ARCOM
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Petition
Sent: Saturday, September 22, = 2001 1:20=20 PM
Subject: Petiton against = war.

Please sign The = Petition at http://home.uchicago= .edu/~dhpicker/petition=20 which appeals to world leaders to be level-headed and, wherever = possible,=20 peaceful in their response to the recent attack against the United = States.=20 PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, AS QUICKLY = AS=20 POSSIBLE. The signatures logged by the website above will be forwarded = to=20 leaders around the world. It is imperative that we act quickly to save = lifes.=20 Soldeirs average is not 50 but 22 years....World leaders average is = 60.=20 Sylvain. Check too: http://www.euronewspaper.de=20

Wygraj 2 dni extra dostepu do Big = Brother
nie daj sie=20 innym wyprzedzic [ http://bigbrother.= onet.pl/platnosci_info.html=20 ]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with = "unsubscribe=20 freebsd-chat" in the body of the message ------=_NextPart_000_0048_01C1436F.BDCACD20-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 11:17:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 988AB37B415 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 11:17:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA06316; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:17:37 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010922121229.053f4df0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:17:10 -0600 To: "Petition" , "freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.org" From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Petiton against war. In-Reply-To: <20010922171836Z602656-5244+3269@ghost2.onet.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Give me a break! Online "petitions" carry no weight whatsoever with politicians because names and addresses are trivial to forge... and because they respond almost exclusively to large campaign contributors. At best, this is a waste of time. At worst, it is a scam that a spammer is using to create a list of active e-mail addresses. Don't fall for it. --Brett Glass At 11:20 AM 9/22/2001, Petition wrote: >Please sign The Petition at http://home.uchicago.edu/~dhpicker/petition which appeals to world leaders to be level-headed and, wherever possible, peaceful in their response to the recent attack against the United States. PLEASE FORWARD THIS MESSAGE TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. The signatures logged by the website above will be forwarded to leaders around the world. It is imperative that we act quickly to save lifes. Soldeirs average is not 50 but 22 years....World leaders average is 60. Sylvain. Check too: http://www.euronewspaper.de > >---------- > >Wygraj 2 dni extra dostepu do Big Brother >nie daj sie innym wyprzedzic [ http://bigbrother.onet.pl/platnosci_info.html ] > >---------- >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 11:22: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from server1.lordlegacy.org (lordlegacy.org [209.61.182.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A066B37B410 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 11:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sharon ([216.13.207.127]) by server1.lordlegacy.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id IAA30319; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 08:33:54 -0500 From: "Stephen Hurd" To: "Paul Robinson" , "Stephen Hurd" Cc: , "Technical Information" , "FreeBSD Chat" Subject: RE: Helping victims of terror Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 12:33:11 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-reply-to: <20010922121807.C55559@jake.akitanet.co.uk> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Jury of their peers... sorry to slap that one in there, I > actually HAVE been > > seeing similar statements, but are they any more likely to come to a fair, > > impartial decision as a jusy chosen from a country that has been > screming for > > his blood for the last few years? > > An agrument used by various Nazi war criminals over the years. In that case, > the only people who would qualify to be judge and jury would be the Swiss > who historically are on everybody's side at the same time whilst maintaining > they aren't on anybody's side. The US really wouldn't like a country where > all motor sport is illegal and every male adult is a member of the army > (sounds almost Taliban-ish), to take over the running of this though. :-) Actually, I didn't have a very good reason for responding to that bit. I really have no solution to what would be a fair and impartial court. In all honesty, the crime was commited in the states, so it should be tried in the states under US laws. Or by the UN under international law. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 15:21:55 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E9A637B40E for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 15:21:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.245.142.122.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.142.122]) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f8MMLd324465; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 15:21:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3BAD0ED0.BC9FF50E@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 15:21:04 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Hurd Cc: Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Stephen Hurd wrote: > Jury of their peers... sorry to slap that one in there, I actually HAVE been > seeing similar statements, but are they any more likely to come to a fair, > impartial decision as a jusy chosen from a country that has been screming for > his blood for the last few years? Of course, you are right. We should have terrorists decide the fate of other terrorists. Preferrably, we should use terroists who are being funded by the man personally, in order to guarantee their impartiality. Right. > > > If the US granted asylum to someone say (totally random example) from > > > the IRA, and the British said "Hand him over, or we'll bomb the hell > > > out of you. You're harbouring him, so that makes you responsible for > > > all he has done... > > > > You'll have to pick a different example; the U.S. and the U.K. > > have extradition treaties which would preclude this happening; > > it was, in fact, these treaties which allowed the U.S. to take > > custody of the Osama bin Laden sponsored terrorist responsible > > for the bombing of the Pan Am jetliner over Lacherby Scotland, > > and who was scheduled to be sentenced in U.S. courts September > > 12th -- the day after the attack on the U.S.. > > I won't have to pick a different example, extradition is often > fought and sometimes not granted. The extradition treaties don't > flat out guarantee that the person will be extridited. Name one case where an IRA member was requested to be extradited from the U.S. and the extradition was not granted. > One of the resons for not extriditing is a lack of evidence, The U.S. permits extradition for questioning. > or (essentially) if the offense is not considered an offense > by the country granting refuge... I seem to remember somebody > being not extridited because he was sentenced to be caned... The U.S. has permitted extradition by countries of people who were accused of criminal acts in their contries of origin, even though the acts were not crimes in the U.S.. The exception to this rule is the granting of political assylum. In point of fact, if you have committed a crime in another country, they will not have to ask the U.S. for extradition: the U.S. will deport you. > > > including this stuff that we don't have any hard evidence that > > > he actually did." > > > > This is idiotic. We have proof, which we have shared with our > > allies. We would be incredibly stupid to compromise both our > > intelligence assets, as well as disclosing our reconissance > > capabilities, to people who have shown themselves to be our > > enimies by killing our civilians. > > Who has proof? Have you seen it? I haven't. Until they make it > public, or even say that they have it, they are proceeding without > proof. They have said they had it. I'm sure they will be happy to show the proof to any allied government, but you are kidding yourself if you believe they will expose their intelligence assets to sympathizers. > > This would be the same government who dynamited some of the > > largest and oldest Buddist statues in the world a month or > > so ago, in an extreme demonstration of religious intolerance, > > and an attempt to rewrite the history of their country. This > > would be the same government which just assasinated their major > > opposition leader via the auspices of a terrorist suicide bomber, > > a short week before the attack on the U.S.. This would be the > > same government which has permitted Osama bin Laden to operate > > his international terrorist organization unchecked from within > > their borders, turning a blind eye to his activities, such as > > the bombing of civilian airliners in Scotland, U.S. embassies > > in Nigeria and other African countries, and the recent attempt > > to sink the U.S.S. Cole. Right? > > Proof of the suicide bomber being sent by the government? I'm > not aware of any. His dead body? > I haven't looked into this though. It would probably behoove you to do so, before so strongly arguing their case for them. > As for the "blind eye" I'll have to dig up a bit more information... Start with Pan Am in Lacherby Scotland, and the previous attempt on the World Trade Center. > but the government seems to believe that they have cut off all of > Bin Ladens communitaction with the outside world (I don't believe > this, but they do - or say they do) in the US, that is not done > even to prisoners on death row. This is incorrect. Until earlier this year, we tracked bin Laden using his cell phone. If he had a cell phone, he was not cut off. > I would be perfectly happy with generalizations and data that would > not compromise U.S. Intelligence assests. If the head of the CIA > comes out and says "A source in Bin Ladens camp has been told by > someone close to Bin Laden that Bin Laden did in fact organise the > attack" I don't think that would compromise anyone or anything. But > they don't say that. That's because you are wrong: knowing that there is an inside source would result in a purge, which would likely compromise the source; if it didn't, it would reduce the potential number of sources sufficiently to render any source which were there useless as a source of future information for an extended period of time, if not indefinitely. > What Rumsfeld says is: > > "... what we do know is that this is not a problem of al Qaeda and > Osama bin Laden. It is a problem of a number of networks of terrorists > that have been active across the globe, and it is something that > strikes at the very heart of what Americans are, which is free people. " In other words, they are not ruling out participation by others, and they are going to go after everyone who poses a similar threat. This is reasonable and prudent, in light of the events of the 11th. > What it boils down to is "Afghanistan is first" I've spend the last hour > looking for any press statement even saying that the government posses > proof that bin laden was responsible... I couldn't find a single one. Please see the press release by the French Government last Thursday, involving the Qaeda and a planned attempt on a U.S. Embassy, which resulted in a number of arrests. > Now I don't think "We posess proof that it was bin laden... no > further comment" would compromise any U.S. Intelligence assets, or > any others countries assets either. I agree that this would be nice. It's the first suggestion you've made that would not explicitly or implicitly compromise assets. > > They "publically expressed outrage"? Was this before or after > > they stated that a religious court should judge him, and we > > should accept the outcome, if the activist zealots of the same > > stripe as Osama bin Laden found in his favor? > > It was before. And after the US said they would not differentiate > between the terrorists themselves and the countries that harboured > them and after it was apparent that they were convinced that bin > laden was responsible. The statement about terrorist allied states was made far in advance of singling out bin Laden: it was made in Bush's address on the day of the attack. > > This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. The U.S. > > is in no way acting as terrorists: terrorists bomb first, and > > claim credit afterwards -- assuming that they don't say to > > themselves "Oh shit... I've stepped in it this time...". > > In hostage situations, terrorists get the hostages into a position where they > can be killed from, then demand that their demands be met or they will kill > the hostages. They do NOT kill the hostages first, they make demands first > such as "hand the following 10 prisoners over to us" Thew U.S. is not threatening to kill hostages. It is threatening collaborators. It is not even yet an explicit military threat: it is a threat which might merely involve economic sanctions, such as those which have been imposed on Iraq following Iraq's attack on Kuwait, and the use of poison gas on its own Kurdish and other minority citizens, in violation of the Geneva Convention. > A quote from President Bush -- WASHINGTON, Sept. 21, 2001 > "Deliver to United States authorities all the leaders of Al Qaeda > who hide in your land ... Close immediately and permanently every > terrorist training camp in Afghanistan, and hand over every terrorist, > and every person in their support structure, to appropriate authorities > ... These demands are not open to negotiation or discussion, The Taliban > must act, and act immediately. They will hand over the terrorists, or > they will share in their fate." > --- end quote Frankly, I have no problem with this. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization. It really doesn't matter if they are the ones responsible for a particular terrorist act, or not: they are terrorists. I guess that the people who think this is unreasonable simply do not understand Western thought. Western thought has an idea called an "Aristotilian mean" -- a black or white, binary state of being, which permits such ideas as "if you are not with us, you are against us"... with no room for the concept of neutrality. > If Afghanistan refuses to capture bin laden and hand him over, that > is the (stupid analogy bit) equivelant of ordering a landlord to go > in and arrest a murderer on threat of death when there is a swat team > sitting outside with the house surrounded. I'm certain that the U.S. will be happy with permission to come in and get bin Laden, if the Afghani's can't locate him on their own. Such permission would deflect the threat you claim the U.S. is making: to go with your analogy, it's a "I'm not responsible for my tenant" argument. > I feel that these are unreasonable demands... the the Afghanistan > government does not have the resources to implement them. And they > are being threatened with their very lives if they do not. Well, it's going to happen anyway, regardless of what you or anyone else feels, so the best advice possible is to stay out of the way and cooperate as much as possible. The U.S. will not turn the other cheek over the attacks. > > > That is the bit that scares me. If the United States said "We are > > > going to hunt all terrorists down no matter where they hide - that's > > > why we have special forces and are justifiably pround of our ability > > > to effect pinpoint strikes with massive firepower." I would be about > > > 87% behind them. That's not what they're saying though. > > > > Pinpoint strikes are not effective at avoiding civilian > > casualties, when you are fighting against people who hide > > behind civilians. The best chance at avoiding collateral > > damage would be if they were willing to excise the cancer > > themselves, rather than forcing the U.S. to go hunting for it. > > I'm not saying there must be no civilian casualties. That is, always > has been, and probobly always will be flat out impossible in most > situations. I'm saying take the war to the terrorists who perpetrated > the crime, not the people who run the country in which they live. I'm going to suggest, then, that when they hide behind the people who run the country in which they live, that those people step three feet to the left to avoid becoming collateral damage. > It's the REASON to go to war with Afghanistan not the war itself > that I take exception to. Harboring terrorists? That's about the best reason the U.S. has had for any of its military actions since World War II. > If Afghanistan does NOT attack the US troops, they are then NOT > protecting bin laden and his troops. Cool. That would make them our allies. We have no problem with our allies. We had no problem with bin Laden, when he was a U.S. ally. Now, he;'s not. > With their army and their internal problems, I would be hesitant > to try to go in, capture bin laden, and hand him over to the United > States government. Hesitant for the U.S. to do this, or hesitant for their internal forces to attempt this? If the latter, I agree, though how your claim "the government seems to believe that they have cut off all of Bin Ladens communitaction with the outside world" allows them this belief without them also knowing his location leaves me rather curious. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 15:51:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF85537B407 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 15:51:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.245.142.122.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.142.122]) by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f8MMpMH09376; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 15:51:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3BAD1619.6185D081@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 15:52:09 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Robinson Cc: Stephen Hurd , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010921173959.02994178@threespace.com> <20010922115619.B55559@jake.akitanet.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Paul Robinson wrote: > This might be over the top, but this is all starting to get a little 1930's > for my taste... some of the tactics being used by Bush to justify himself > are definitely ones that wiff a little of those used by the man whose name I > shall merely abbreviate as 'H'. Like I say, over the top, but it is all > starting to feel rather surreal. I have to disagree; I think a more apt analogy would be the 1940's. The U.S. is in a fury similar to that following the bombing of Perl Harbor: interviews on the UC Berkeley campus with students who profess to have, up until recent events, held war and military service as unconscionable, indicate a willingness to server in the U.S. armed forces in order to deal with this event. This is a profound philosophical shift, at a fundamental level. Stephen E. Ambrose, the only sanctioned biographer of the man, who spent many hours interviewing him, quotes Dwight D. Eisenhower as saying "Hitler should beware of the fury of an aroused democracy". These words were echoed in the Protocol of Proceedings of the Potsdam Conference, in August of 1945: The result of the futile and senseless German resistance to the might of the aroused free peoples of the world stands forth in awful clarity as an example to the people of Japan. The might that now converges on Japan is immeasurably greater than that which, when applied to the resisting Nazis, necessarily laid waste to the lands, the industry and the method of life of the whole German people. The full application of our military power, backed by our resolve, All mean the inevitable and complete destruction of the Japanese armed forces and just as inevitably the utter devastation of the Japanese homeland. The time has come for Japan to decide whether she will continue to be controlled by those self-willed militaristic advisers whose unintelligent calculations have brought the Empire of Japan to the threshold of annihilation, or whether she will follow the path of reason. Following are our terms. We will not deviate from them. There are no alternatives. We shall brook no delay. There must be eliminated for all time the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest, for we insist that a new order of peace security and justice will be impossible until irresponsible militarism is driven from the world. Perhaps the participants in this thread are unaware of history, or are unaware of how resolute the majority of the U.S. truly is, with regard to the recent terrorist attacks. The only thing missing is the explicit parallel statement "...until terrorism is driven from the world". -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 16:21:19 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81DA237B429 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 16:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dialup-209.245.142.122.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net ([209.245.142.122] helo=mindspring.com) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.32 #2) id 15kw4z-0004nt-00; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 16:21:02 -0700 Message-ID: <3BAD1D06.6E56344F@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 16:21:42 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Richards Cc: Stephen Hurd , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> <948140000.1001159802@lobster.originative.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Paul Richards wrote: [ ... destruction of Buddist statues as a part of revisionism in Afghanistan ... ] > You are showing a prejudice against a > people that you do not have respect for because of their beliefs and > actions. In your mind that makes it acceptable to carry out actions that > you would find abhorrent if carried out against a nation you did respect. Incorrect; I am only attempting to demonstrate a pattern of a profound lack of respect for others. In the U.S., we tend to have people who have been trained to believe that all opinions have equal validity, and thus we tend to extend the belief in such a belief to others; just as a child might personify a teddy bear, U.S. citizens trained in the throes of political correctness have a tendency to "Americanize" their view of others, and thus accept zealots as being "just people with different points of view", rather than perceiving the dangers which lie in such intolerance. > Harbouring terrorists is the other main issue. The Irish govt. had > terrorists based within its borders for the whole time of the conflicts > there (and it's not completely resolved yet). What the US is planning with > respect to Afghanistan is akin to the UK waging war against Ireland for > harbouring terrorists that were bombing London. Technically, the U.K. is harboring those same terrorists; this is a different issue than the U.S. "harboring" Kazinsky, for example, given the basis for governance. > This is not a war; a small number of individuals have committed a heinous > crime and they should be tracked down and brought to justice. That is a far > cry from invading a foreign power for not doing as they're told. You are wrong. This is a war. It is much more a war than the so-called "war on drugs", and it is much more a war than "the Gulf War", or, come to that, the Vietnam or Korean wars. Not since the civil war have there been such casualties on U.S. soil. Unlike those others, this war has near unanimous support of the U.S. citizenry. > From Afghanistan's perspective, they are not attempting to hide Bin Laden, > they've made a diplomatically astute statement, that clearly shows, at > least in my mind, that they do not want to fight this battle and that if > the US wants him they can have him. However, the Taliban would be > committing political suicide to do the US' dirty work. The social > environment in that part of the world is such that most of the population > hates the US and would rise up and overthrow a regime that supported it. > This is a real danger for the Pakistan govt. who are seeing large > demonstrations on its streets already. The demonstrations in Pakistan are a relatively small percentage of their population. There is some indication that they are being intentionally incited. I really no more believe the Pakistani demonstrations than I believe the file footage of the Christmas celebrations in a number of countries represented an anti-US celebration of the terrorist acts in Washington, New York, and Pennsylvania. > > They "publically expressed outrage"? Was this before or after > > they stated that a religious court should judge him, and we > > should accept the outcome, if the activist zealots of the same > > stripe as Osama bin Laden found in his favor? > > Umm, the last statement I heard was that they would not hand him over, but > requested that he leave their territory. That's not showing support for > him, that's turning their back on him, but that's as strong a statement as > they can make publically given their own internal political situation. They > did publically express outrage in fact; the very first public statement > they made was to express sympathy for the US. I agree that they are between a rock and a hard place. But that doesn't mean that they will be cut sufficient slack that bin Laden is not going to held accountable for his actions. > > This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. The U.S. > > is in no way acting as terrorists: terrorists bomb first, and > > claim credit afterwards -- assuming that they don't say to > > themselves "Oh shit... I've stepped in it this time...". > > The IRA generally issued warnings before bombings so that casualties were > minimised. Though they still killed plenty of innocent people it could have > been a lot higher. The main difference here is that the U.S. demands are coming from a duly constituted government of a nation which has had non-combatant civilians attacked and killed, en masse. A closer approximation would be the Nigerian embassy bombing several years ago (also a U.S. embassy, and also a terrorist attack), which resulted in the deaths of ~5,000 Nigerian citizens. > The US approach isn't that different and the IRA would definitely be > considered to be terrorists. While on the subject of the IRA, a lot > of the finance came from the US, so if you accept the current US > thinking then the UK should have invaded the US for aiding and > abetting the IRA over all those years. A lot of financing for _everything_ comes from the U.S., including the financing for Palestinian activities on the West Bank. Any rich nation is in the same boat. > The US, until Clinton got involved, turned a blind eye to the > Irish situation because a lot of US Irish were sympathisers. > That was apparently an "acceptable" struggle being waged. If the U.S. is to be held responsible for the foreign policies of Bill Clinton, then we might as well throw in the towel now. > Terrorism is not some black or white issue. It's a manifestation of > underlying politics. It's hypocritical of the US to wage war on terrorism > at this point given that it has participated and supported it in the past, > as long as it wasn't on their doorstep. On the contrary: dead terrorists do not commit terrorist acts. > Did the US express outrage and decide to wage a war on terrorism when the > IRA blew up the hotel that the UK govt were staying in at the time, or when > they killed a member of our royal family, or when they carried out a mortar > attack on the MI5 HQ? I don't know. I rather suspect that, unless you are talking about the Clinton administration, that the answer is "yes". > Did the UK decide to wage war on innocent countries when faced with > such provocation? You mean like Ireland, for harboring the IRA? That would be a "yes". > There needs to be a reasoned response to this attack, and declaring war on > countries because some of their residents are suspected of being involved > is not a reasonable response. It's more a symptom of the foreign policy the > US has had for many years which led to the terrorist attack in the first > place. i.e. do what we want or we will send the boys around. What if the residents are provably involved, and the country is unwilling to permit extradition? > Incidentally, the support in the west for US action is flimsy. The EU was > very guarded in it's support yesterday. While the UK may be gung ho about > supporting the US that is not reflected across the whole of Europe. No-one > is going to stand up and not support US action, but there's growing feeling > that the US will not be given open-ended support to do whatever it wishes. I think the U.S. will do what it has to do, what it has been forced into the position of being required to do, the actions which are now necessary. The U.S. has generally kept its gloves on, with regard to trying to be "the nice guy", and be everyones friend. > There are many countries on the fringes of the EU that will be very worried > about US retaliation, countries like Turkey for example. In other words, Moslem countries. This is not a vendetta against Moslems, even though bin Laden would love to paint it that way, just as Saddam Hussein attempted to pain the Gulf War, with regard to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait: "Oh, help us brother Moslems against The GReat Satan, and by the way, ignore the fact that we just invaded another Moslem country ourselves... K PLZ THX". The vendetta is against terrorism, and I doubt that it will end with bin Laden -- nor should a peaceful world tolerate such people. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 16:32:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net (avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.121.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D3C837B412 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 16:32:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dialup-209.245.142.122.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net ([209.245.142.122] helo=mindspring.com) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.32 #2) id 15kwFs-0005MU-00; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 16:32:16 -0700 Message-ID: <3BAD1FAE.2F3D40F5@mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 16:33:02 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Stephen Hurd , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Please, it's spelled "Lockerbie". > > > > including this stuff that we don't have any hard evidence that > > > he actually did." > > This is idiotic. We have proof, which we have shared with our > > allies. > > No. You have circumstantial evidence, consisting of clues which are > so outrageously, stupidly obvious that a significant portion of us > non-americans are speculating that it may, quite frankly, have been > fabricated in a hurry on the evening of September 11th. Meanwhile, > you seem to be ignoring equally strong circumstantial evidence > pointing towards Iraq, which would exonerate Usama bin Laden - but > that would force W to admit to a mistake, maybe even apologize to the > Taliban, which would not look good on CNN at all. The spellings I've seen have been "Osama", not "Usama"; which is correct? Yes, Iraq is a state that is known to sponsor terrorism. On the other hand, we have arrested over 50 people in the U.S.; some as material witnesses, but the majority as people involved in some way in the attack, if only in a support role. In other words, we have culprits in hand, and we know their chain of command. > I'd suggest you take a trip to your local Blockbuster and rent "Wag > the Dog", and, if you can get hold of it, "The Second Civil War" (it > was made-for-TV, so I'm not sure you can get it on video). I've seen both of those. If the events are so frivolous as you imply, then the U.S. is more concerned with internal politics, rather than world opinion. If that's the case, then we would simply have attacked already, and to hell with what people think of us, if they are determined to think evil of us, as you imply. > > I'd be perfectly happy with a grand jury and sealed testimony, > > which would not compromise U.S. Intelligence assets. If Osama > > bin Laden would be so kind as to turn himself in to the world > > court, I'm sure that the information would be presented in the > > case against him, under sealed testimony. > > In other words, an unchallengeable witch trial. I'm not saying the > guy's a saint, but in this particular instance you may be barking up > the wrong tree. So your only acceptable level of proof would indicate what we know and how we know it, and potentially result in the deaths of the few sympatheitic people highly enough placed to make a positive difference in the future of their own organizations by acting as their moral compas. > > They "publically expressed outrage"? Was this before or after > > they stated that a religious court should judge him, and we > > should accept the outcome, if the activist zealots of the same > > stripe as Osama bin Laden found in his favor? > > Before - and also before the US responded to their public expression > of outrage and sympathy with what can be summed up as "we're going to > turn your country into the world's largest parking lot". Bombing is _nothing_ compared to the other extreme options available. > > > This sounds a lot like the traditional hostage situation... only > > > now, the United States is holding an ENTIRE COUNTRY hostage. > > > > This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. The U.S. > > is in no way acting as terrorists: terrorists bomb first, and > > claim credit afterwards -- assuming that they don't say to > > themselves "Oh shit... I've stepped in it this time...". > > Oh? You need to read up on modern history (particularly European > history from the 1960s and on, with emphasis on France, Germany and > Italy). You have a lot of terrorists claiming credit before the act over there, do you? It would seem to me with that information, you should be able to prevent the acts. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 17:16: 5 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from jake.akitanet.co.uk (jake.akitanet.co.uk [212.1.130.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F078D37B405 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 17:16:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dsl-212-135-208-201.dsl.easynet.co.uk ([212.135.208.201] helo=wopr.akitanet.co.uk) by jake.akitanet.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #3) id 15kww8-000Bg7-00; Sun, 23 Sep 2001 01:15:56 +0100 Received: from wiggy by wopr.akitanet.co.uk with local (Exim 3.21 #2) id 15kww9-000Ftg-00; Sun, 23 Sep 2001 01:15:57 +0100 Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 01:15:57 +0100 From: Paul Robinson To: Terry Lambert Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Stephen Hurd , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <20010923011557.B60374@jake.akitanet.co.uk> References: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> <3BAD1FAE.2F3D40F5@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3BAD1FAE.2F3D40F5@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Sat, Sep 22, 2001 at 04:33:02PM -0700 X-Scanner: exiscan *15kww8-000Bg7-00*$AK$NezmdLbcxhM4ClWkFigXb1* Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sep 23, Terry Lambert wrote: > The spellings I've seen have been "Osama", not "Usama"; which is > correct? I've always seen it as Osama. Usama is closer to how it's pronounced. > Yes, Iraq is a state that is known to sponsor terrorism. So is the USA - god knows how many operations the CIA have backed, involving everything from drug smuggling through to terrorism. In fact, they gave Laden his weaponary and training in the first place. As I've stated elsewhere, certain portions of the US population don't seem to have a problem with the IRA either. > I've seen both of those. If the events are so frivolous as > you imply, then the U.S. is more concerned with internal > politics, rather than world opinion. If that's the case, then > we would simply have attacked already, and to hell with what > people think of us, if they are determined to think evil of > us, as you imply. Even Bush isn't stupid enough to piss off the EU countries, the UN security council and NATO. This *is* about internal politics - Bush is attempting to do what his father did (who in turn learnt from Margaret Thatcher) by engaging in a war that is positive from a publicity point of view. All this makes him look good with the electorate. Yes, I am cynical enough to believe that is his primary motive - he knows he is now far more popular than he was before the 11th September, and the reason he is popular is because he now has the oppurtunity to push the right buttons... > Bombing is _nothing_ compared to the other extreme options > available. See above. Bush knows, and more importantly his advisors know that if gets to that point, he has a problem with the whole of the UN. The US might be big, but it's not big enough to avoid getting into the shit. > You have a lot of terrorists claiming credit before the act > over there, do you? It would seem to me with that information, > you should be able to prevent the acts. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 17:25:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 424C137B408 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 17:25:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA87229; Sun, 23 Sep 2001 02:25:24 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: Paul Robinson Cc: Terry Lambert , Stephen Hurd , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror References: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> <3BAD1FAE.2F3D40F5@mindspring.com> <20010923011557.B60374@jake.akitanet.co.uk> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 23 Sep 2001 02:25:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20010923011557.B60374@jake.akitanet.co.uk> Message-ID: Lines: 11 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Paul Robinson writes: > On Sep 23, Terry Lambert wrote: > > The spellings I've seen have been "Osama", not "Usama"; which is > > correct? > I've always seen it as Osama. Usama is closer to how it's pronounced. The FBI spell it "Usama" on their top ten list of wanted fugitives. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 17:28:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail12.speakeasy.net (mail12.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.212]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6174237B419 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 17:28:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 12109 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2001 00:28:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mgm) ([216.27.148.137]) (envelope-sender ) by mail12.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 23 Sep 2001 00:28:36 -0000 Message-ID: <013c01c143c6$bf4c0360$89941bd8@speakeasy.net> Reply-To: "jason" From: "jason" To: "Stephen Hurd" , "Paul Robinson" , , "Paul Richards" , "Dag-Erling Smorgrav" Cc: "Technical Information" , "FreeBSD Chat" References: <3BAD0ED0.BC9FF50E@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 20:29:00 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org After hearing Bush's speech last night it would seem this is not a war against Bin Laden and not a war aginast whoever hit the Trade Center. It is rather a war against ANY and ALL terrorist groups who has in the past and will in the future carry out any terrorist attack against the US or its allies. Its not against Afghanastan...all they have to do is either give up Bin Laden or allow us to go in and get him. We are not at war with Afghanastan. We are at war with the terroist in their borders. All Afghanistan has to do is let our troops pass to get Bin Laden. But they will no doubt resist us to prevent the capture of Bin Ladin. Who here can say that the War on Terrorist is not a valid one? If I were to go to your house and burn it to the ground murdering your entire family, wouldn't you want justice? Wouldn't you want that person captured, and either put in jail for life or executed? The same is true here. Terrorist all over the world and for many many years have killed Americans and others on planes, buildings, embassies, and even our own military bases and ships. We have gone long enough just hoping it will stop. These terrorists will not stop until we do something about it. Its about time we did something about it. In order to wipe out Terrorism (if that's completely possible) is to remove their funding....remove their places to train and plan missions....keep them on the defensive. If there are countries that provide funding....or willing provide space for their camps.....or protect them from outside invasion....then these country's governments should be removed from power or otherwise dealt with. We are not asking for Afghanistan find and capture Bin Laden. but we are asking them to allow us to go in and find him ourselves. To cross their border and attack Bin Laden's camps. That's all Pakistan is doing for us. Just allowing our troops inside their borders to carry out their missions against Bin Laden. And its not going to stop there. Bin Laden has bases in many other countrie s. And there are other Terrorist groups we will be going after as well. This will indeed be a long and deliberate war waged all around the world. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 17:43:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail11.speakeasy.net (mail11.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.211]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 019B837B416 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 17:43:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 65734 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2001 00:43:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mgm) ([216.27.148.137]) (envelope-sender ) by mail11.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 23 Sep 2001 00:43:13 -0000 Message-ID: <015e01c143c8$c93505a0$89941bd8@speakeasy.net> Reply-To: "jason" From: "jason" To: "Paul Robinson" , "Terry Lambert" Cc: "Dag-Erling Smorgrav" , "Stephen Hurd" , "Technical Information" , "FreeBSD Chat" References: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> <3BAD1FAE.2F3D40F5@mindspring.com> <20010923011557.B60374@jake.akitanet.co.uk> Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 20:43:28 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >"Paul Robinson" Wrote: > I've always seen it as Osama. Usama is closer to how it's pronounced. My roomate is named Osama. Its spelled only that way and is apparently a popular name in that part of the world. > > Yes, Iraq is a state that is known to sponsor terrorism. > > So is the USA - god knows how many operations the CIA have backed, involving > everything from drug smuggling through to terrorism. In fact, they gave > Laden his weaponary and training in the first place. As I've stated Why would we support Bin Laden when he has hated the US for some many years? We did support Suddam at one point only because or Iran. I can't recall any one time where the US had any interest in training or helping Bin Laden's group. Name one. > elsewhere, certain portions of the US population don't seem to have a > problem with the IRA either. > The IRA as far as I know didn't knowck over any US buildings. Although UK has to deal with that sort of thing the same way we deal with out own internal terrorist. I think we all remember Okalahoma City. > > I've seen both of those. If the events are so frivolous as > > you imply, then the U.S. is more concerned with internal > > politics, rather than world opinion. If that's the case, then > > we would simply have attacked already, and to hell with what > > people think of us, if they are determined to think evil of > > us, as you imply. > > Even Bush isn't stupid enough to piss off the EU countries, the UN security > council and NATO. This *is* about internal politics - Bush is attempting to > do what his father did (who in turn learnt from Margaret Thatcher) by > engaging in a war that is positive from a publicity point of view. All this > makes him look good with the electorate. Yes, I am cynical enough to believe > that is his primary motive - he knows he is now far more popular than he was > before the 11th September, and the reason he is popular is because he now > has the oppurtunity to push the right buttons... > He is not doing it for the approval rating as much as he is doing it because the vast majority of Americans will demand it. His approval rating will go up by doing what the citizens think he should do in this situation. So basically he is doing what he was elected to do. > > Bombing is _nothing_ compared to the other extreme options > > available. > > See above. Bush knows, and more importantly his advisors know that if gets > to that point, he has a problem with the whole of the UN. The US might be > big, but it's not big enough to avoid getting into the shit. > Unless we plan to take on the rest of the world I think the US would be best adviced to not consider those other "extreme options available". This will probably be handled in a more conventional mannor or warfare. > > You have a lot of terrorists claiming credit before the act > > over there, do you? It would seem to me with that information, > > you should be able to prevent the acts. > Some terrorists have announced attacks before but most wait until after. It depends on the demands of the terrorists and the target of the attack. The US has attacked without warning and with warning. Compare Iraq bombing (before ground war) and the bombing of Libya. The presence of forewarning has nothing to do with it being a terrorist attack or a retaliation. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 18:47: 7 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com [24.254.60.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C47EC37B429 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 18:46:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ATLANTA.threespace.com ([24.21.224.204]) by femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with ESMTP id <20010922202104.EIXF23549.femail28.sdc1.sfba.home.com@ATLANTA.threespace.com> for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 13:21:04 -0700 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010922153752.017f8b18@threespace.com> X-Sender: tech@threespace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 16:20:35 -0400 To: FreeBSD Chat From: Technical Information Subject: What is it good for? (was "Helping Victims of Terror") Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I could respond to all the individual points that were made, but I'd be here all day, and I really want to install my fresh new FreeBSD 4.4-RELEASE before the weekend is over. ;-) First of all, I think that everybody agrees that what happened in the U.S. on September 11th was atrocious. I think that every government except Iraq's made official statements to that effect. Secondly, I don't think that anybody wants a full-blown war. That would mean the loss of bloodshed and life for everyone involved including the U.S., and I really don't believe that we're the warmongers that we're often made out to be in other places. Finally, I think that everyone agrees that some sort of response from the U.S. is necessary or at least well within our rights. And that seems to be about where the agreements end. Some think that the U.S. is being the bully here, using its superior military power in an attempt to coerce a smaller nation into giving up one of its citizens. There have also been cries that the U.S. completely hypocritical for being largely oblivious to the tragedies of other countries and then decrying September 11th as one of the darkest days in the past 50 years. Others, like myself, think that the U.S. has already shown considerable restraint with its use of military force. Remember, it has already been 11 days since the incident as I write this, and there has been NO OFFICIAL MILITARY ACTION WHATSOEVER. (Motion, but not action.) The destroyed plane, bombed embassies, the Cole bombing--and now this. It has escalated well beyond the point of a response, and I think most other nations would already be firing shots by now. Afghanistan's hand waving about how they have bin Laden contained have gotten old. (I question how the Taliban can know this when their only means of communication with him is radio...but his communication with the outside world is cut off, right?) So now they're in a position where they're told to assist the U.S. and turn over bin Laden or suffer the consequences of having the U.S. go *through* them to get to him. No, it's not an enviable position, but I don't think they're inculpable in this situation. As a kid I used to hang out with guys who shoplifted, so it couldn't really come as any surprise to me when I found myself in the back of a police car for something I hadn't directly been part of. You are the company you keep. Let's just hope that this doesn't become a war or a widespread global conflict. Like I said, I think we all agree on that part. --Chip Morton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 19: 5:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail11.speakeasy.net (mail11.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.211]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3789437B427 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 19:05:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 84985 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2001 02:05:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mgm) ([216.27.148.137]) (envelope-sender ) by mail11.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 23 Sep 2001 02:05:02 -0000 Message-ID: <024601c143d4$37253e80$89941bd8@speakeasy.net> Reply-To: "jason" From: "jason" To: "FreeBSD Chat" , "Technical Information" References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010922153752.017f8b18@threespace.com> Subject: Re: What is it good for? (was "Helping Victims of Terror") Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 22:05:25 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I agree with you in most parts but think I should correct you on one point. Usama Bin Laden is not a citizen of Afghanistan. He is from Saudi Arabia. The reason he is pissed off at America is because Saudi allowed our troops into the some Islamic Holy city (forget the name) back during the Iraq/Kuwait deal. And according to the FBI 10 most wanted list, his name is Usama not Osama...just found that out minutes ago. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Technical Information" To: "FreeBSD Chat" Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2001 4:20 PM Subject: What is it good for? (was "Helping Victims of Terror") > I could respond to all the individual points that were made, but I'd be > here all day, and I really want to install my fresh new FreeBSD 4.4-RELEASE > before the weekend is over. ;-) > > First of all, I think that everybody agrees that what happened in the U.S. > on September 11th was atrocious. I think that every government except > Iraq's made official statements to that effect. > > Secondly, I don't think that anybody wants a full-blown war. That would > mean the loss of bloodshed and life for everyone involved including the > U.S., and I really don't believe that we're the warmongers that we're often > made out to be in other places. > > Finally, I think that everyone agrees that some sort of response from the > U.S. is necessary or at least well within our rights. > > And that seems to be about where the agreements end. > > Some think that the U.S. is being the bully here, using its superior > military power in an attempt to coerce a smaller nation into giving up one > of its citizens. There have also been cries that the U.S. completely > hypocritical for being largely oblivious to the tragedies of other > countries and then decrying September 11th as one of the darkest days in > the past 50 years. > > Others, like myself, think that the U.S. has already shown considerable > restraint with its use of military force. Remember, it has already been 11 > days since the incident as I write this, and there has been NO OFFICIAL > MILITARY ACTION WHATSOEVER. (Motion, but not action.) The destroyed > plane, bombed embassies, the Cole bombing--and now this. It has escalated > well beyond the point of a response, and I think most other nations would > already be firing shots by now. Afghanistan's hand waving about how they > have bin Laden contained have gotten old. (I question how the Taliban can > know this when their only means of communication with him is radio...but > his communication with the outside world is cut off, right?) > > So now they're in a position where they're told to assist the U.S. and turn > over bin Laden or suffer the consequences of having the U.S. go *through* > them to get to him. No, it's not an enviable position, but I don't think > they're inculpable in this situation. > > As a kid I used to hang out with guys who shoplifted, so it couldn't really > come as any surprise to me when I found myself in the back of a police car > for something I hadn't directly been part of. You are the company you keep. > > Let's just hope that this doesn't become a war or a widespread global > conflict. Like I said, I think we all agree on that part. > > --Chip Morton > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 22 19:27:38 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mailgate.originative.co.uk (mailgate.originative.co.uk [62.232.68.68]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A44C837B415 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 19:27:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lobster.originative.co.uk (lobster [62.232.68.81]) by mailgate.originative.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C931D162; Sun, 23 Sep 2001 03:27:30 +0100 (BST) Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 03:27:30 +0100 From: Paul Richards To: tlambert2@mindspring.com Cc: Stephen Hurd , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Helping victims of terror Message-ID: <1220300000.1001212050@lobster.originative.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <3BAD1D06.6E56344F@mindspring.com> References: <3BAC3644.1CB0C626@mindspring.com> <948140000.1001159802@lobster.originative.co.uk> <3BAD1D06.6E56344F@mindspring.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --On Saturday, September 22, 2001 16:21:42 -0700 Terry Lambert wrote: >> Did the US express outrage and decide to wage a war on terrorism when the >> IRA blew up the hotel that the UK govt were staying in at the time, or >> when they killed a member of our royal family, or when they carried out >> a mortar attack on the MI5 HQ? > > I don't know. I rather suspect that, unless you are talking > about the Clinton administration, that the answer is "yes". I suggest you look into the issues a little more deeply. The US did nothing to assist the UK in it's fight against terrorism. It was actually Clinton that changed US policy to try and broker peace in the province, until that time the US was assisting the IRA, at least to the extent that it was allowing it's citizens to support the cause financially. >> Did the UK decide to wage war on innocent countries when faced with >> such provocation? > > You mean like Ireland, for harboring the IRA? That would be a > "yes". That would be no. That's a ludicrous statement to make; the UK never waged a war against Ireland. >> There needs to be a reasoned response to this attack, and declaring war >> on countries because some of their residents are suspected of being >> involved is not a reasonable response. It's more a symptom of the >> foreign policy the US has had for many years which led to the terrorist >> attack in the first place. i.e. do what we want or we will send the boys >> around. > > What if the residents are provably involved, and the country is > unwilling to permit extradition? Then you live with it. Just like the UK lived with the fact that the Locherbie bombers were resident in Libya. You pursue many avenues to try and bring them to justice but you don't go declaring war on them. It's the attitude that the US has that suggests that the solution is to go and invade and teach the world a lesson. That's actually not very civilised at all. Paul Richards FreeBSD Services Ltd http://www.freebsd-services.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message