Grex Agora46 Conference

Item 218: For Our Brothers

Entered by twenex on Thu Sep 11 19:06:02 2003:

It's hard to know what to write on an occasion like this.

In all parts of the world, people will quietly or otherwise be recognising
(commemmorating sounds too cheeful a word) The Evil Act that was committed
on 11 September 2001.

It's all been said before. I just wanted to say, Britain is with you.

Thanks.

Jeff.
58 responses total.

#1 of 58 by other on Thu Sep 11 20:37:40 2003:

Cast not your pearls before swine.

Throw your support behind freedom, not behind America.  Eventually, 
Americans may recognize the difference and join you.


#2 of 58 by bru on Thu Sep 11 22:19:01 2003:

Maybe you will learn something someday and realize whatan ass you were today.


#3 of 58 by scott on Fri Sep 12 00:29:08 2003:

Re 2:  I'd throw your own comment back at you.  America is currently having
serious issues with "freedom", and the current President is most of the
problem.


#4 of 58 by klg on Fri Sep 12 01:00:30 2003:

Thank you, twenex.


#5 of 58 by jaklumen on Fri Sep 12 07:16:06 2003:

In twenex's defense (I guess): he did not exactly say America.  But 
freedom is not a bad idea to specify.

But again, as a centrist and Independent, I still submit this to say-- 
I don't exactly side with Bruce, or with Scott and Eric.  You may have 
found that 9/11 doesn't inspire great patrotic passion within my 
breast.  I'm much too iconoclastic to reduce my complex feelings to 
some simple flag-waving or dogmatic tripe I hear so often lately.

Nor do I always feel the need to take the intellectual high road.  I 
know GW seems to really be the Republican's "boy," but at times, I 
can't help but wonder if the Democrats aren't overly worried.  Sue 
me.  I'm not left of center.  Of course I'm not going to be as 
alarmist.  But that doesn't mean I like it, either.

Of course, politics aside, resp:2 sounded *really* stupid.


#6 of 58 by flem on Fri Sep 12 14:55:01 2003:

re #1:  *applause*


#7 of 58 by klg on Fri Sep 12 16:10:13 2003:

"Freedom" means having the right to post resposes such as 1 3, & 6.  
Unfortunately, there are those (a minority, to be sure) who fail - for 
whatever reason - to make that connection and, therefore, lack an 
appreciation of the blessings that have been bestowed upon us.


#8 of 58 by happyboy on Fri Sep 12 16:42:20 2003:

GOD BLESS YOU KLG!


#9 of 58 by klg on Fri Sep 12 16:57:40 2003:

Thank you. I believe He does, and most people thoughout this great 
nations and his most wonderful world.


#10 of 58 by happyboy on Fri Sep 12 17:00:57 2003:

and god bless the ceo of this GREAT CORPORATION 
GEORGE BUSH  JUNIOR!!!


#11 of 58 by other on Fri Sep 12 17:27:34 2003:

I appreciate the freedom that I have to do things like post #1.  And 
because I appreciate it, it pisses me off when my government works to 
tear down the freedoms its predecessors fought for.  The America I 
referred to in #1 is not the America which guarantees the rights to say 
unpopular things without being treated as at best a threat and at worst a 
criminal and a traitor.

This is why I honored the victims of the 11 September 2001 attacks by 
sending a check to the ACLU.


#12 of 58 by other on Fri Sep 12 17:38:28 2003:

What did YOU (collective, individual, whatever) do to honor the essential 
American freedoms that 9/11 were an attack upon, in commemoration of that 
anniversary?


Donations to the ACLU can be mailed to:
125 Broad Street 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004-2400


#13 of 58 by happyboy on Fri Sep 12 18:49:10 2003:

awesome, eric!


#14 of 58 by klg on Fri Sep 12 19:52:56 2003:

So, how exactly has your personal freedom been torn down.  Give us some 
concrete, not theoretical or hypothetical, examples.  (By the way, how 
are you fighting for freedom &/or honoring your predecessors who did?)


#15 of 58 by flem on Fri Sep 12 20:19:03 2003:

*cough*patriot act*cough*


#16 of 58 by other on Fri Sep 12 20:32:34 2003:

Every time the congress of the United States passes, and the President of 
the United States signs a law which hides the processes of the federal 
justice system under a cloak of secrecy, or allows law enforcement 
agencies more latitude to investigate or detain citizens of the United 
States without proof or even reasonable suspicion that they have violated 
criminal laws, my rights and freedoms have been torn down, threatened, or 
violated.  If I have to wait until *I'm* arrested or investigated before 
I can claim to have had my freedoms abridged then I have waited far too 
long.  #14 seems to suggest that there is nothing to be learned from the 
experiences and reflections of Pastor Martin Niemoller (google it).


#17 of 58 by klg on Sat Sep 13 01:09:53 2003:

Mr. flem,
Take a drink of water.

Mr. other,
In "other" words, you cannot provide a single example.  Just as we 
suspected.  (As if that will put an end to the leftist whining.)


#18 of 58 by other on Sat Sep 13 04:11:35 2003:

I cannot provide an example, and that fact is totally irrelevant to the 
issue at hand.  It is a classic straw man argument.


#19 of 58 by md on Sat Sep 13 13:04:31 2003:

9/11 was a great tragedy.  3,000+ people were murdered and two huge 
(albeit despised by many New Yorkers pre-9/11) buildings collapsed.  
It happened to us, and no one can blame us for pausing to remember and 
mourn on the anniversary

But meanwhile, many more thousands of Europeans have died because of a 
heat wave which was a manifestation of a worsening global climate 
change for which a plausible case can be made that we -- not George W. 
Bush, not the government of the USA -- we Americans are personally 
responsible.  But we expect Europe to drop what it's doing every 9/11 
from now on and hold solemn commemorative ceremonies and send us 
messages of sympathy.  Puh-leez.  


#20 of 58 by rcurl on Sat Sep 13 14:11:46 2003:

You spread collective guilt too widely. For one thing, there are a significant
number of Americans that accept that global warming is a major threat to
the world and that American leaders should start doing something about it.
However a majority of Americans either don't believe or care and they have
elected leaders that feel the same way. In addition, there is a large
component of "tragedy of the commons" in this - each person in our society
generally follows the urge to enhance their own wealth and happiness, with
the consequence of ever increasing resource depletion and, perhaps most
important, ever increasing population. These factors are, of course, also
present or potential in every other nation - who generally aspire also
to increased consumption (with a modicum, here and there, of lip service
to population control, economy, and restraint). 


#21 of 58 by md on Sat Sep 13 14:34:20 2003:

"there are a significant number of Americans that accept that global 
warming is a major threat to the world and that American leaders 
should start doing something about it."  

Oh please.  You really think that gets you off the hook?  


#22 of 58 by russ on Sat Sep 13 18:27:24 2003:

Re #19:  I understand that China is already burning 20% more coal
than the USA, and is ramping up rapidly; if there is a bogeyman
role here, Beijing seems to want to nudge the US out of it.  (The
caveats of the current administration about exceptions for
"developing" economies in the Kyoto treaty now appear well-founded.)


#23 of 58 by md on Sat Sep 13 18:36:49 2003:

True.  All we did was get there first.  


#24 of 58 by aruba on Sat Sep 13 19:27:28 2003:

I think the US is still far in the lead when you tally up carbon dioxide
emmissions, either gross or per capita.


#25 of 58 by rcurl on Sat Sep 13 20:20:08 2003:

So, md, what are you doing to get yourself off the hook? I drive an
ordinary car, have a high efficiency furnace and keep a cool house (and wear
sweaters) - and I vote for candidates that promise to have US follow the
Kyoto agreement. What do you do?


#26 of 58 by md on Sat Sep 13 22:19:38 2003:

I understand and admit that I'm part of the problem.  That's the main 
difference between you and me on this issue.  

As it happens, I do have a super-high-efficiency furnace and always 
keep the house 60-ish in winter.  But that's just because I'm by 
nature both a cold-weather person and notoriously cheap, not because 
of any environmental concerns.  And I don't delude myself that having 
a super-high-efficiency furnace somehow makes me a Friend of the Earth.

As to your voting record, you have every right to be proud of it.  But 
you must realize that "Even voting for the right is doing nothing for 
it. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should 
prevail. A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, 
nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority." - Thoreau


#27 of 58 by klg on Sun Sep 14 02:28:10 2003:

Yes!  We can ratify the Kyoto Agreement and for the mere price of 
Billions of $$ put off the (supposed) effects of "global warming" by a 
whopping two whole years!!  Such a deal.  (We got a bridge you might be 
interested in buying, too.)


#28 of 58 by rcurl on Sun Sep 14 06:22:56 2003:

I haven't said I'm not part of the problem _ *everyone* is part of the
problem. However I think both by voting and by my own personal choices
and my influence (such as it is) on others, I am doing just about
as much as an ordinary individual can do, and that is more than going off into
the woods and only leading an individual spartan existence. 


#29 of 58 by sj2 on Sun Sep 14 09:32:18 2003:

Re #17, If Patriot II gets passed, you may never be able to get an 
example of someone prosecuted under it.
http://www.idahogreens.org/Greenweb/IssuesHtml/pat2sum.htm

Example: Section 126 allows federal agents to access consumer credit 
reports without a subpoena or court order, and no one would be 
notified that their records had been accessed. 

Heh, now how would anyone find an example of the abuse of such a law?

Section 504 abolishes fair hearings for lawful permanent residents 
convicted of criminal offenses through an "expedited removal" 
procedure, and prevents any court from questioning the government s 
unlawful actions by explicitly exempting these cases from habeas 
corpus. Congress has not exempted any person from habeas corpus -- a 
protection guaranteed by the Constitution -- since the Civil War. 


#30 of 58 by sj2 on Sun Sep 14 09:41:26 2003:

How would any law enforcement agency in the world crack communication 
encrypted with say 3DES/AES?

IMHO, unless criminals/terrorists use plain text to communicate, it is 
meaningless to tap ISPs. No?


#31 of 58 by scott on Sun Sep 14 12:46:29 2003:

Re 27:  Hey, if we can (apparently) afford $87 billion for Bush's reelection
war, then we ought to be able to afford Kyoto.  

Ard one merely needs to note the hottest summer on record in Europe to suspect
that perhaps global warming isn't a liberal scare story after all.


#32 of 58 by twenex on Sun Sep 14 13:44:55 2003:

Well said, sir.


#33 of 58 by russ on Sun Sep 14 22:21:43 2003:

Re #23:  And this makes it okay for others to simultaneously condemn
us and try to take our place?

Re #24:  That's largely due to history.  How would you change that
overnight, when we have such a large installed base of everything?

The real problem is that the developing countries, such as China and
India, are trying to develop via more or less the same route that the
USA did.  This will not only have them belching CO2 at the rate we
were/are, it will give them the same problem of replacing infrastructure
that we're refusing to face.  Exempting them from emissions rules will
just make the problem worse.

Part of the problem is that some leftist organizations want to structure
carbon abatement as an income transfer; every human being gets some CO2
allowance, and can either buy more or sell theirs for money.  They want
all the billions of third-world babies who aren't burning much in the
way of fuel (save by deforestation, perhaps) to be supported by the first
world, not to mention the massive "graveyard entitlement" that would appear.
This idea is dismissed out of hand by most non-leftists, and emissions
reduction gets held hostage.  It makes far more sense to require that
all long-term-fixed carbon release be taxed to a certain level worldwide,
and let people find ways which have the least net carbon release (which
would coincide, unremarkably, with the least carbon-tax paid).

Re #27:  We can also improve our balance of payments a lot, clean up the
air in our cities and slash the funding available to Islamofascists
with the same measure.  What do you have against that, Kerry?

Re #31:  We should start charging off that $87 billion with taxes paid
at the gas pump.  The problem should start fixing itself quickly.

The really crazy thing is that many conservation measures have a net
negative cost, yet people don't even consider them.  Electric cars are
potentially cheaper to own and run than ICE cars, and we should be
planning for a changeover as fast as we can.

Right now I'm investigating the possibilities of massive cogeneration
systems combined with hybrid-electric vehicles and wind power.  The wind
power potential of the area off the west coast of Michigan alone appears
to be about 7.4 GW average.  If full exploitation didn't cut total fossil
fuel use of the state by more than 50%, I'd be greatly surprised.


#34 of 58 by sj2 on Mon Sep 15 06:31:30 2003:

Re #17, your examples klg

New Terror Laws Used Vs. Common Criminals 
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?
tmpl=story&cid=514&e=8&u=/ap/20030914/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/anti_terror_law
s_2


#35 of 58 by md on Mon Sep 15 12:12:51 2003:

"Re #23:  And this makes it okay for others to simultaneously condemn
us and try to take our place?"

I don't *think* I said that, but who knows?  

You realize that even after we've gone over to solar and wind power 
and hydrogen engines, and the others in their billions have soiled the 
nest so badly that humankind is half-a-generation from extinction, 
they'll *still* be blaming us.


#36 of 58 by tod on Mon Sep 15 13:35:33 2003:

This response has been erased.



#37 of 58 by scott on Mon Sep 15 13:37:04 2003:

So, would you rather help fix a problem, or just worry about how others will
view us and do nothing?


#38 of 58 by tod on Mon Sep 15 15:56:38 2003:

This response has been erased.



#39 of 58 by gull on Tue Sep 16 00:28:58 2003:

Re #17: It's hard to provide examples because information about use of 
many of the Patriot Act provisions is classified.  In some cases even 
statistics about how many times provisions have been used have ben ruled 
to be secret information.  I suspect this was written in specifically 
*because* it lets proponents of the law claim opponents can't point to 
specific cases of abuse.



#40 of 58 by sj2 on Tue Sep 16 09:15:27 2003:

Re #36, the idea that muslim nations hate the US bcoz they-dont-
worship-muhammed is mostly propogated by a few fundamentalist 
organisations and the media. I have no reason to believe that the 
common man on the street in the middle-east region follows that logic. 

However, they do dislike the US and its allies bcoz they perceive the 
actions of the US and its allies as meddling in their affairs. 

I cannot say whether that perception is true or false but its sad to 
see that the media keeps selling this story that they-hate-us-bcoz-we-
are-rich-and-not-muslims (and it seems to find a lot of buyers).


#41 of 58 by gull on Tue Sep 16 14:26:26 2003:

The U.S. meddles in *everyone's* affairs.  They shouldn't take it
personally. ;>


#42 of 58 by tod on Tue Sep 16 16:56:58 2003:

This response has been erased.



#43 of 58 by twenex on Wed Sep 17 08:53:49 2003:

Yes, for them it *is* a religious matter. However, that doesn't mean that
*all* Muslims are anti-American/anti-Western etc. Just beause British people
are brought up to hate the IRA because they are terrorists doesn't mean all
Irish people are the same. I know several personally who are not. There must
be more where they came from.


#44 of 58 by twenex on Wed Sep 17 13:03:53 2003:

Oh, and by the way. Have the levels of intelligence, education and courtesy
amngst the GREX population really sunk so low that we have to commemmorate
a tragic event by *bitching* at each other? If only you knew how tempted i
was to go back and delete this item for that reason.


#45 of 58 by flem on Wed Sep 17 15:02:45 2003:

Oh, my god!  Bitching on grex??!  Next thing you know, there will be *drift*
or something, and then where will we be??


#46 of 58 by tod on Wed Sep 17 18:37:05 2003:

This response has been erased.



#47 of 58 by twenex on Wed Sep 17 19:23:46 2003:

Not necessarily. Catholics *tend* to be republicans and Protestants tend to
be loyalists, but there is some crossover. And there is also the Alliance
Party, which is cross-community. If you wish to drag religion into it, America
is more religious than much of Europe; politicians proclaiming "God Bless Grat
Britain" would stick in many people's throats.


#48 of 58 by tod on Wed Sep 17 21:20:36 2003:

This response has been erased.



#49 of 58 by rcurl on Wed Sep 17 22:23:19 2003:

They have a State church, so it isn't surprising that it's "God Save our
Gracious Queen". 


#50 of 58 by twenex on Wed Sep 17 22:34:45 2003:

God Save the Queen, actually. And it's generally recognised htat the
embarrasment of having a State Church in a country where (a) at least half
of the indigenous population is non-church going and (b) efforts are being
made to promote multiculturalism is part of the reason why there is a
moratorium on bringing religion into politics.

Furthermore, a significant number of monarchists (not to mention republicans,
i.e. those who advocate the abolition of the monarchy) advocate the
replacement of God Save the Queen with, for example, Land of Hope and Glory,
or even "Imagine," by John Lennon. The religious contingent advocate
"Jerusalem", which is where the phrase "[England's] Green and Pleasant Land"
originated.


#51 of 58 by tod on Wed Sep 17 22:54:47 2003:

This response has been erased.



#52 of 58 by twenex on Thu Sep 18 00:35:17 2003:

If i were dah, i believe my response would be, "AH HA HA HAHAH HA HA!!".

If I were dah...


#53 of 58 by dah on Thu Sep 18 00:39:43 2003:

No, because if you were me you'd realise that's only somewhat funny and not
unfunny enough to deserve an ironic "HAHahahaha, eTc.
"


#54 of 58 by tod on Thu Sep 18 03:31:57 2003:

This response has been erased.



#55 of 58 by dah on Thu Sep 18 04:19:27 2003:

something like that.


#56 of 58 by twenex on Thu Sep 18 10:35:27 2003:

Apparently Jedi garnered something like 200,000 adherents, and wasn't put on
the census despite the Government's own claims that any religion which garned
over 100,000 adherents (i think) would be put on the list. I wouldn't say that
means "the majority of non-church-going [Brits] were Jedi Knights", though;
the majority of people in Britain are non-church-going, and hte poulation of
the UK is around the 59 million mark (49 million or so of whom live in England
proper, i.e. not in Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland.)


#57 of 58 by tod on Thu Sep 18 17:18:43 2003:

This response has been erased.



#58 of 58 by twenex on Thu Sep 18 22:54:28 2003:

/grin


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: