AC, I can understand why you would mis-interpret my remarks. I did not intend to say that there was a conspiracy. I intended to say that the problems are caused by people who place money first in their lives, and have no moral rule against killing.
"They are making decisions regarding their longstanding agendas and using
the "war on terrorism" as a cover."
This seems exactly right. The evidence suggests that the real motivating
factors for top political decisions are weapons and oil. The U.S. is the
largest seller of weapons in the world. The U.S. gives billions of dollars in
aid to Israel, part of which must be spent to buy weapons from U.S.
manufacturers. U.S. weapons manufacturers also sell weapons to Arabs.
This is a quote from the official testimony to the U.S. House of
Representatives of Unocal Vice President John J. Maresca, on February 12,
1998. He said, in part, "CentGas cannot begin construction [of a gas
pipeline] until an internationally recognized Afghanistan government is in
place."
For a link to this document on the House of Representatives government web
site, and a document about the pipeline route, search on the word Unocal in:
What should be the Response to
Violence?
The Bush family has ties to Unocal. Richard Armitage, deputy secretary of of
the U.S. Defense Deparment, made a trip to Burma (where Unocal has interests)
that was paid for by Unocal.
It seems possible that the war in Afghanistan is being waged to allow the
pipeline to go through.
It's like the "war on drugs" which has increased the amount of drugs available
in the United States.
Moderators, please recognize that what Archfeld said, in the parent post, is
true.
Archfeld says, "in the middle east for ONE purpose ONLY, oil as we all know
it..."
"REALITY says people do not just become SUICIDE bombers for
NO REASON."
and
"IF our government had not systematically SCREWED everyone they've ever
dealt with in the Middle East maybe things would be different."
This is a quote from the official testimony to the U.S. House of
Representatives of Unocal Vice President John J. Maresca, on February 12,
1998. He said, in part, "CentGas cannot begin construction until an
internationally recognized Afghanistan government is in place."
For a link to this document on the House of Representatives government web
site, and a document about the pipeline route, search on the word Unocal in:
What should be the Response to
Violence?
I went to the NAI website and tried to buy PGP about 18 months ago. There were
problems with the site. The product was poorly explained, and I got error
messages.
Also, would you buy encryption software from ANYONE who wasn't offering the
source code? I had read that NAI would give the source code to someone who
bought the product, but I was unable to find mention of that on their web
site.
I sent NAI an e-mail message, and no one replied.
Finally, I just gave up and used the free version. I paid less (zero) and got
more.
The story says, "I worked there up until today and somewhere around 250 of
the 300 employees were clipped."
Do I understand this correctly? What could 250 people be doing with PGP, a
product that was written by one man, and was changing very slowly?
Maybe they were selling special versions in Arabic to Saudis living in
Afghanistan? (When you have 4 wives, you have to keep a lot of secrets.)
You lose a lot. First, the government is no longer supporting the
public network.
The Internet MUST be made secure. We need to accomplish that, not just allow
it to be insecure and then pay for a lot of separate networks. It would be
great to have the government help everyone else accomplish security.
Second, having a separate network creates a sense of separateness among
government employees. There is too much of that already.
Remember, a separate network means that employees no longer have access to the
Internet. They can't join in with the discussion on Slashdot, for example.
They can't see what people are saying. They can't do research on other ways of
achieving security. They can't check their e-mail. A democracy should try to
accomplish security, but not separateness.
Third, having a completely separate network is EXPENSIVE. We lose the right to
spend our money on something else.
There are cheaper ways of accomplishing security.
Every time someone proposes to do something that doesn't make sense, and costs
a lot of money, look for the real reason.
You didn't read carefully, or you visited the article earlier and forgot to do a
View/Reload to reload your browser, so that you were reading an old version.
The article says, "The lowest figure sometimes quoted, including only
deaths due to military action, is 1.740,000." The article quotes a CNN
story that says 3,000,000.
Comments like yours are helpful because I didn't realize before how many
people don't know the numbers.
The government of Vietnam claims that civilian casualties were far
higher. I haven't been able to find a link to that in English, so it is not in
the article.
This is important if the United States is your country, or if it isn't.
AC, you are missing the point. The U.S. weapons makers sell weapons to both
sides. The U.S. weapons makers sell weapons to both the U.S. government
and to the other side of many conflicts. The U.S. government itself always
pays far more. If a poor country has a billion dollars of weapons, the U.S.
government fights with 10 billion dollars, or a hundred.
The selling to both sides is about money. It is similar to the situation where
Robert Moses paid billions of dollars to destroy New York city neighborhoods.
Sometimes rich people support powerful politicians because it is profitable,
even though it is destructive to their country.
The U.S. weapons makers sell weapons to both the Israelis and Arabs.
Somebody posted a message earlier saying that U.S. weapons makers were still
selling weapons to Saddam Hussein during the buildup for the Gulf War between
the U.S. government and Iraq.
This is a lot bigger than you seem to realize. If you are a U.S. taxpayer, you
pay your share of $3.2 billion to Israel every year so that
Israel can buy weapons made in the United States. Then you pay so that the
U.S. government will be able to fight conflicts due to political instabilities
in the region.
Everything I've said is meant to be conservative. Most people don't realize
how many people have been killed by the U.S. government, so I added links to
the number of people killed in three countries to the article, What should be the Response to
Violence? Search on "Vietnam". The numbers are greater than I said
earlier, because I was not counting all the countries, or deaths due to Agent
Orange, or other civilian deaths.
The article is just a part-time, unpaid effort. I will try to post more links
to sources for weapons expenditures later. For now, here is just one: See the
Oct. 6, 2001 Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service article by Paul
Richter, Stingers old but could pose threat. "Stingers" are
very expensive missiles made in the United States. The Taliban has them.
I really feel I need 20 GHz. Anything that shaves even a few minutes off my day is very welcome. Considering just the work I do now, a 20 GHz processor might make my day 10% shorter.
If I had that speed I would do a lot of video processing. I also hope there would be good voice recognition. Long waits for compiling would disappear.
Links to sources for the number of people killed in three countries have been added to the
article, What should be the
Response to Violence?. Search on "Vietnam".
I'm unhappy that things have come to such a state that people feel the only thing to do is D.
Also, I would have liked more investigation, and less emphasis on "surgical" strikes that nevertheless kill innocent bystanders.
Bombing is not a socially skilled way to interact with people, and we were doing it long before a few mentally deranged Arabs decided to do it inside the U.S.
Yes, I wrote the article I
reference. But there are over 300 pages of articles to which I link that I
didn't write. They come from such sources as CBS, NBC News, ABC News, BBC
News, and others. This is more their story than it is mine.
nobodyman, this is serious business. This is our country.
You quote the article: "The U.S. has the highest percentage of citizens in
prison of any country ever, in the history of the world."
Then you say, "(which is just plain wrong, and you don't bother to back it
up)."
In the article I did show how to find all the information yourself. Don't
believe me. Do the research.... in the history of the world is taken
from a study done of prisons throughout the ages. For example, the size of
ancient Roman prisons is known, and the population is roughly known.
The article, What should be the
Response to Violence? is just a part-time attempt to pull together some
links. It started out as a letter to friends. It is not complete.
I have plenty of other things to do, and I wouldn't bother with this if it
weren't important. I have paid work to do, so I lose my hourly rate for work
done without pay.
It is a minority point of view, but I forgot to mention there are some famous
people who agree with me: For example, Jesus Christ and Hillel, the Jewish
sage.
"All you did is get on your soapbox..."
It is not only my soapbox. Look at all the links to articles by ABC
News, BBC News, MSNBC, and others. In the referenced article, I give many, many
links to stories, and give some of my own explanation. If you download all the
linked stories, there are over 325 pages. I've written only a few pages.
"Besides, many (if not most) of the people we trained are in the Northern
Alliance."
Maybe. I would have no way of evaluating that. However, there is only one
person the CIA trained who is presently at issue: Osama bin Laden.
The fact is, the CIA designed all the procedures the terrorists used. Do you
know many Arabs? I do, and planning is not their best skill. Americans are
much better planners. I think if you ask a few Arabs, they will agree with
this.
"... but the divisiveness among the ranks caused them to lose power to the
Taliban."
That's not what MSNBC, CBS, ABC News, and others say. They say the CIA, or the
CIA and the ISI, put the Taliban in power. DO NOT believe me. Research it
yourself.
"When you come up with a solution, maybe people will be more willing to
listen."
Plenty of people listen. It is the people who make money selling weapons who
don't listen.
You are right, I don't have complete answers. However, if the U.S. works on
how to live in the world without killing for a few years, and spends 1/10th
the money it spends on war-making capability, I guarantee it can do better.
Non-violence can be a lot more powerful when it gets the same preparation and
attention as violence.
A quote from the article I referenced: "Israel receives an astounding
$905 per year for every man, woman and child who lives there.
Israel is required to spend most of this money to buy weapons from U.S.
weapons makers. One Jewish leader calls it welfare for the weapons makers.
Remember, Israeli citizens don't pay U.S. taxes.
Please look beyond what you are being told. This is not an adult video game.
I'd like to express a minority view: If you have been reading the news since
the Vietnam war, this present "war" was entirely predictable in 1980. The U.S.
government began its involvement in Afghanistan 21 years ago. (See the ABC
News timeline link in the article referenced below.)
The CIA brought Arabs to the U.S. and trained them in terrorist techniques.
Here is a quote from an ABC News article:
"Abu Sayyaf... train[ed] terrorists in the methods taught by the CIA..."
For links to stories about this from MSNBC, ABC News, The Atlantic Monthly
magazine, and other respected sources, see the article: What should be the Response to
Violence?
Afghanistan is the 15th country the U.S. government has bombed in 30
years, an average of 5 countries bombed every 10 years. Will there be 5 more
countries in the next 10 years?
It was entirely predictable that someone would try to bring the violence to
the United States, given the violence the U.S. government has done for more
than 30 years. The U.S. government has killed more than 3,000,000 people in
that time. To quote the biblical saying, "You reap what you sow."
If you really, really love the U.S. like I do, you will think carefully about
the problems of the U.S. government.
Weapons making is EXTREMELY profitable. There are people who do hidden things
to push the U.S. government into conflict because they want the money. The
U.S. is the world's largest weapons manufacturer. The World Policy
Institute, in a May 1995 article, "Weapons at War" said, "In the past ten
years, parties to 45 current conflicts have taken delivery of over $42 billion
worth of U.S. weaponry." (The links for these statements are in the article
referenced above.)
"... HotHardware features a review where they use one of these new
processors in an Intel D815EEA2 motherboard, one that Intel shows as not
supporting the new processor. What gives?"
If I understand the table correctly, it is probably just a case of not having
updated their web site. Intel is notoriously sloppy about things like that.
About a year ago I called and talked to an Intel employee about a huge mistake
on their web site. He said it would be fixed immediately. Eight months later
the error was still there. I called and talked to the same man again about the
same error. He didn't realize I had called before. He told me again it would
be fixed immediately. Again it was not fixed. This is just one example.
Be careful with the D815EEA2 motherboard. If you remove a removeable drive, it
may re-configure the BIOS, without any warning, and boot from the wrong drive.
Be careful with the network adapter if it is built into the D815EEA2. It
assumes that it is attached to a huge network. If it is attached to a
peer-to-peer network, you may not be able to make it function. An Intel
technical support person and I worked on this problem for more than an hour.
The final answer was to buy a CNET network adapter for $12.00 and disable the
network adapter on the motherboard.
Also, if you are running a Raid 0 controller like the Promise Technology
FastTrak 100, the D815EEA2 BIOS has a very weird configuration. It is not
obvious how you get the motherboard to boot from the Raid controller, because
the way you select it is hidden.
...the system would focus with laserlike precision on a tiny
handful of the guilty. (This assumes that the terrorists aren't cunning enough
to disguise themselves.)
There is a very serious problem: People in power want to use technology, but
they don't understand it. Lack of understanding doesn't stop them! They just
charge ahead with laws like the DMCA and other craziness.
There is considerable use of the feelings surrounding the September 11
terrorism to get support for goals that they wanted to accomplish anyway, but
that would not be supported before.
Slashdot Mirror
PostgreSQL has CygWin Support for NT.
AC, thanks for the EXCELLENT link.
AC, I can understand why you would mis-interpret my remarks. I did not intend to say that there was a conspiracy. I intended to say that the problems are caused by people who place money first in their lives, and have no moral rule against killing.
"They are making decisions regarding their longstanding agendas and using the "war on terrorism" as a cover."
This seems exactly right. The evidence suggests that the real motivating factors for top political decisions are weapons and oil. The U.S. is the largest seller of weapons in the world. The U.S. gives billions of dollars in aid to Israel, part of which must be spent to buy weapons from U.S. manufacturers. U.S. weapons manufacturers also sell weapons to Arabs.
This is a quote from the official testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives of Unocal Vice President John J. Maresca, on February 12, 1998. He said, in part, "CentGas cannot begin construction [of a gas pipeline] until an internationally recognized Afghanistan government is in place."
For a link to this document on the House of Representatives government web site, and a document about the pipeline route, search on the word Unocal in: What should be the Response to Violence?
The Bush family has ties to Unocal. Richard Armitage, deputy secretary of of the U.S. Defense Deparment, made a trip to Burma (where Unocal has interests) that was paid for by Unocal.
It seems possible that the war in Afghanistan is being waged to allow the pipeline to go through.
It's like the "war on drugs" which has increased the amount of drugs available in the United States.
Moderators, please recognize that what Archfeld said, in the parent post, is true.
Archfeld says, "in the middle east for ONE purpose ONLY, oil as we all know it..."
"REALITY says people do not just become SUICIDE bombers for NO REASON."
and
"IF our government had not systematically SCREWED everyone they've ever dealt with in the Middle East maybe things would be different."
This is a quote from the official testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives of Unocal Vice President John J. Maresca, on February 12, 1998. He said, in part, "CentGas cannot begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan government is in place."
For a link to this document on the House of Representatives government web site, and a document about the pipeline route, search on the word Unocal in: What should be the Response to Violence?
Fine, in the business unit, but I don't know what 250 people could be doing. If you do, provide a list.
I went to the NAI website and tried to buy PGP about 18 months ago. There were problems with the site. The product was poorly explained, and I got error messages.
Also, would you buy encryption software from ANYONE who wasn't offering the source code? I had read that NAI would give the source code to someone who bought the product, but I was unable to find mention of that on their web site.
I sent NAI an e-mail message, and no one replied.
Finally, I just gave up and used the free version. I paid less (zero) and got more.
The story says, "I worked there up until today and somewhere around 250 of the 300 employees were clipped."
Do I understand this correctly? What could 250 people be doing with PGP, a product that was written by one man, and was changing very slowly?
Maybe they were selling special versions in Arabic to Saudis living in Afghanistan? (When you have 4 wives, you have to keep a lot of secrets.)
Secrecy and weapons sales corrupt democracy: What should be the Response to Violence?
You lose a lot. First, the government is no longer supporting the public network.
The Internet MUST be made secure. We need to accomplish that, not just allow it to be insecure and then pay for a lot of separate networks. It would be great to have the government help everyone else accomplish security.
Second, having a separate network creates a sense of separateness among government employees. There is too much of that already.
Remember, a separate network means that employees no longer have access to the Internet. They can't join in with the discussion on Slashdot, for example. They can't see what people are saying. They can't do research on other ways of achieving security. They can't check their e-mail. A democracy should try to accomplish security, but not separateness.
Third, having a completely separate network is EXPENSIVE. We lose the right to spend our money on something else.
There are cheaper ways of accomplishing security.
Every time someone proposes to do something that doesn't make sense, and costs a lot of money, look for the real reason.
President Bush's father is connected with a company that wants to put a pipeline across Afghanistan: What should be the Response to Violence?
People are using the terrorist threat to do things they wanted to do anyway, but would not normally be allowed.
Secrecy and weapons sales corrupt democracy: What should be the Response to Violence?
U.S. government:
"We must take your freedom away so that you can continue to have freedom."
"Only violence stops violence."
Secrecy and weapons sales corrupt democracy: " What should be the Response to Violence?
Here's a link that works:
Osama bin Laden: Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders
He is doing what he can to make violence seem reasonable. But it isn't.
What Can Technology Do For Us?
For $600,000, we can buy a Tomanhawk missile and...
I imagine a dung beetle thinking to himself, "Why would anyone go to so much trouble to move my favorite rock?"
If you have good technology, you can be really annoying to dung beetles.
ABC News article: "Abu Sayyaf
You didn't read carefully, or you visited the article earlier and forgot to do a View/Reload to reload your browser, so that you were reading an old version.
The article says, "The lowest figure sometimes quoted, including only deaths due to military action, is 1.740,000." The article quotes a CNN story that says 3,000,000.
Comments like yours are helpful because I didn't realize before how many people don't know the numbers.
The government of Vietnam claims that civilian casualties were far higher. I haven't been able to find a link to that in English, so it is not in the article.
This is important if the United States is your country, or if it isn't.
You are exactly right that violence is an old tradition. So, let's do some research and find ways to stop.
AC, you are missing the point. The U.S. weapons makers sell weapons to both sides. The U.S. weapons makers sell weapons to both the U.S. government and to the other side of many conflicts. The U.S. government itself always pays far more. If a poor country has a billion dollars of weapons, the U.S. government fights with 10 billion dollars, or a hundred.
The selling to both sides is about money. It is similar to the situation where Robert Moses paid billions of dollars to destroy New York city neighborhoods. Sometimes rich people support powerful politicians because it is profitable, even though it is destructive to their country.
The U.S. weapons makers sell weapons to both the Israelis and Arabs. Somebody posted a message earlier saying that U.S. weapons makers were still selling weapons to Saddam Hussein during the buildup for the Gulf War between the U.S. government and Iraq.
This is a lot bigger than you seem to realize. If you are a U.S. taxpayer, you pay your share of $3.2 billion to Israel every year so that Israel can buy weapons made in the United States. Then you pay so that the U.S. government will be able to fight conflicts due to political instabilities in the region.
Everything I've said is meant to be conservative. Most people don't realize how many people have been killed by the U.S. government, so I added links to the number of people killed in three countries to the article, What should be the Response to Violence? Search on "Vietnam". The numbers are greater than I said earlier, because I was not counting all the countries, or deaths due to Agent Orange, or other civilian deaths.
The article is just a part-time, unpaid effort. I will try to post more links to sources for weapons expenditures later. For now, here is just one: See the Oct. 6, 2001 Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service article by Paul Richter, Stingers old but could pose threat. "Stingers" are very expensive missiles made in the United States. The Taliban has them.
I really feel I need 20 GHz. Anything that shaves even a few minutes off my day is very welcome. Considering just the work I do now, a 20 GHz processor might make my day 10% shorter.
If I had that speed I would do a lot of video processing. I also hope there would be good voice recognition. Long waits for compiling would disappear.
Links to sources for the number of people killed in three countries have been added to the article, What should be the Response to Violence? . Search on "Vietnam".
I totally agree with A, B, C, and E.
I'm unhappy that things have come to such a state that people feel the only thing to do is D.
Also, I would have liked more investigation, and less emphasis on "surgical" strikes that nevertheless kill innocent bystanders.
Bombing is not a socially skilled way to interact with people, and we were doing it long before a few mentally deranged Arabs decided to do it inside the U.S.
"(an article written by yourself, I might add)"
Yes, I wrote the article I reference. But there are over 300 pages of articles to which I link that I didn't write. They come from such sources as CBS, NBC News, ABC News, BBC News, and others. This is more their story than it is mine.
nobodyman, this is serious business. This is our country.
You quote the article: "The U.S. has the highest percentage of citizens in prison of any country ever, in the history of the world."
Then you say, "(which is just plain wrong, and you don't bother to back it up)."
In the article I did show how to find all the information yourself. Don't believe me. Do the research.
The article, What should be the Response to Violence? is just a part-time attempt to pull together some links. It started out as a letter to friends. It is not complete.
I have plenty of other things to do, and I wouldn't bother with this if it weren't important. I have paid work to do, so I lose my hourly rate for work done without pay.
"Yes, indeed this is a minority point of view."
It is a minority point of view, but I forgot to mention there are some famous people who agree with me: For example, Jesus Christ and Hillel, the Jewish sage.
"All you did is get on your soapbox..."
It is not only my soapbox. Look at all the links to articles by ABC News, BBC News, MSNBC, and others. In the referenced article, I give many, many links to stories, and give some of my own explanation. If you download all the linked stories, there are over 325 pages. I've written only a few pages.
"Besides, many (if not most) of the people we trained are in the Northern Alliance."
Maybe. I would have no way of evaluating that. However, there is only one person the CIA trained who is presently at issue: Osama bin Laden.
The fact is, the CIA designed all the procedures the terrorists used. Do you know many Arabs? I do, and planning is not their best skill. Americans are much better planners. I think if you ask a few Arabs, they will agree with this.
"... but the divisiveness among the ranks caused them to lose power to the Taliban."
That's not what MSNBC, CBS, ABC News, and others say. They say the CIA, or the CIA and the ISI, put the Taliban in power. DO NOT believe me. Research it yourself.
"When you come up with a solution, maybe people will be more willing to listen."
Plenty of people listen. It is the people who make money selling weapons who don't listen.
You are right, I don't have complete answers. However, if the U.S. works on how to live in the world without killing for a few years, and spends 1/10th the money it spends on war-making capability, I guarantee it can do better. Non-violence can be a lot more powerful when it gets the same preparation and attention as violence.
A quote from the article I referenced: "Israel receives an astounding $905 per year for every man, woman and child who lives there. Israel is required to spend most of this money to buy weapons from U.S. weapons makers. One Jewish leader calls it welfare for the weapons makers. Remember, Israeli citizens don't pay U.S. taxes.
Here's another link to the article again: What should be the Response to Violence?
Please look beyond what you are being told. This is not an adult video game.
I'd like to express a minority view: If you have been reading the news since the Vietnam war, this present "war" was entirely predictable in 1980. The U.S. government began its involvement in Afghanistan 21 years ago. (See the ABC News timeline link in the article referenced below.)
The CIA brought Arabs to the U.S. and trained them in terrorist techniques. Here is a quote from an ABC News article:
"Abu Sayyaf
For links to stories about this from MSNBC, ABC News, The Atlantic Monthly magazine, and other respected sources, see the article: What should be the Response to Violence?
Afghanistan is the 15th country the U.S. government has bombed in 30 years, an average of 5 countries bombed every 10 years. Will there be 5 more countries in the next 10 years?
It was entirely predictable that someone would try to bring the violence to the United States, given the violence the U.S. government has done for more than 30 years. The U.S. government has killed more than 3,000,000 people in that time. To quote the biblical saying, "You reap what you sow."
If you really, really love the U.S. like I do, you will think carefully about the problems of the U.S. government.
Weapons making is EXTREMELY profitable. There are people who do hidden things to push the U.S. government into conflict because they want the money. The U.S. is the world's largest weapons manufacturer. The World Policy Institute, in a May 1995 article, "Weapons at War" said, "In the past ten years, parties to 45 current conflicts have taken delivery of over $42 billion worth of U.S. weaponry." (The links for these statements are in the article referenced above.)
From the story:
"... HotHardware features a review where they use one of these new processors in an Intel D815EEA2 motherboard, one that Intel shows as not supporting the new processor. What gives?"
If I understand the table correctly, it is probably just a case of not having updated their web site. Intel is notoriously sloppy about things like that.
About a year ago I called and talked to an Intel employee about a huge mistake on their web site. He said it would be fixed immediately. Eight months later the error was still there. I called and talked to the same man again about the same error. He didn't realize I had called before. He told me again it would be fixed immediately. Again it was not fixed. This is just one example.
Be careful with the D815EEA2 motherboard. If you remove a removeable drive, it may re-configure the BIOS, without any warning, and boot from the wrong drive.
Be careful with the network adapter if it is built into the D815EEA2. It assumes that it is attached to a huge network. If it is attached to a peer-to-peer network, you may not be able to make it function. An Intel technical support person and I worked on this problem for more than an hour. The final answer was to buy a CNET network adapter for $12.00 and disable the network adapter on the motherboard.
Also, if you are running a Raid 0 controller like the Promise Technology FastTrak 100, the D815EEA2 BIOS has a very weird configuration. It is not obvious how you get the motherboard to boot from the Raid controller, because the way you select it is hidden.
What should be the Response to Violence?
Yes, I'm sure. Before this feature existed, the failure rate was far higher.
From the article:
There is a very serious problem: People in power want to use technology, but they don't understand it. Lack of understanding doesn't stop them! They just charge ahead with laws like the DMCA and other craziness.
There is considerable use of the feelings surrounding the September 11 terrorism to get support for goals that they wanted to accomplish anyway, but that would not be supported before.
ABC News article: "Abu Sayyaf