Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #165259 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-15 13:22 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-06-18 13:00 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 529 — 41 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
"Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-15 13:22 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:01 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 04:21 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust pechter@pechter.net (William Pechter) - 2016-06-18 18:56 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-19 13:31 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-19 16:59 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-06-22 16:41 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 07:58 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 08:13 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> - 2016-06-16 10:38 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> - 2016-06-16 10:44 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> - 2016-06-16 10:46 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:27 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-16 19:08 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-17 12:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-17 14:11 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-17 21:22 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 16:47 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-17 23:02 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 09:12 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 11:49 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 15:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-01 19:09 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-18 17:32 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 19:07 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 16:33 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-06-17 17:19 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 19:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-18 00:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 15:48 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 15:44 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-18 22:40 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 05:05 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:12 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-01 19:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-17 02:30 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-16 22:26 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-20 19:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-21 09:02 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 04:14 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-21 11:42 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-21 10:24 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-21 12:08 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-21 17:13 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 07:05 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-21 13:16 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-21 12:44 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-21 14:01 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-22 06:35 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-22 05:43 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 18:44 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-22 08:52 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:49 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-22 13:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 14:11 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:22 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-22 21:03 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-23 14:17 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-22 23:47 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-23 09:11 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 05:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-23 07:51 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 20:52 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-24 12:30 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-25 09:03 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 05:23 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 19:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-23 12:10 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 20:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:33 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-24 17:14 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-24 20:13 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-24 21:59 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-25 08:49 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:10 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:00 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 07:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:40 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-06-25 12:05 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:07 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-25 15:31 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 15:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 19:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 21:45 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-26 01:16 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-25 18:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 20:12 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-28 10:43 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 08:36 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@Last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-28 16:47 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-28 19:41 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 09:14 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-29 10:42 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-29 10:04 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 12:28 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 17:52 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-29 12:15 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-29 15:45 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-29 15:29 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:32 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-29 16:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-29 18:45 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 18:02 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-29 19:37 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-29 17:11 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-29 22:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-30 18:54 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-30 13:22 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-30 22:49 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-01 08:35 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-01 12:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-01 18:19 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:29 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-03 15:12 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-01 11:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-01 12:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-01 16:40 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-01 21:46 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-01 23:21 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 04:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 13:21 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 09:55 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 07:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-02 07:36 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-02 12:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-02 13:30 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-03 17:55 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-04 17:07 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 15:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:32 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:48 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 19:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-06 08:15 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-06 12:54 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-04 21:19 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-04 16:48 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-04 21:25 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 09:26 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 12:08 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 06:36 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 12:40 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 08:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 14:53 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 09:05 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:12 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:33 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 08:54 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:50 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 10:59 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-06 07:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 16:57 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 10:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-05 12:37 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gerard Schildberger <gerard46@rrt.net> - 2016-07-05 13:51 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:12 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 16:35 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-05 11:21 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:33 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 16:38 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-05 17:39 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-05 17:26 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:46 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 09:00 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:29 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:42 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-04 22:25 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-07-05 01:07 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-05 12:54 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 08:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 16:40 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 18:24 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 08:50 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:16 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:16 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 23:21 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 08:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:44 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-06 07:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 16:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-07-06 00:18 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-07-06 08:46 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:42 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-06 12:51 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-05 12:49 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 19:17 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-06 15:12 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-07 01:59 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 03:51 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-08 12:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-08 09:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-08 15:16 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-08 10:56 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-08 14:20 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 19:57 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-09 13:05 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-10 12:06 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-10 17:32 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 19:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 18:43 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust pechter@pechter.net (William Pechter) - 2016-07-12 18:56 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-09 13:04 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-09 13:00 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-09 18:33 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 22:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-09 12:38 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2016-07-11 14:09 +0800
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-08 16:25 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-09 17:17 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-09 12:41 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-09 18:49 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-09 21:38 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-07-10 09:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-10 09:55 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-10 07:04 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-10 17:05 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-11 04:02 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-11 07:55 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-09 12:39 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 13:43 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-09 20:02 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-11 21:19 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-12 07:17 +0100
Insulation - was Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-12 09:42 +0100
Re: Insulation - was Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-12 16:01 +0100
Re: Insulation - was Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-12 09:41 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-09 20:42 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-07-10 09:38 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-11 16:39 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 16:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 12:50 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-08 19:51 -0400
Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-07-08 22:05 -0700
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 07:00 -0400
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 11:12 -0400
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-09 12:35 -0500
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-09 18:08 -0700
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 22:09 -0400
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-09 21:05 -0700
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-10 12:06 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust pechter@pechter.net (William Pechter) - 2016-07-12 18:39 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-13 12:48 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-10 12:06 +0000
Re: Phoenix area TV reception (was: Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-10 07:01 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 10:51 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-02 16:50 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 16:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-02 22:27 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:22 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 16:18 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:20 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 11:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 12:24 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-05 12:51 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 13:28 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 14:57 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 11:36 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 17:12 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-05 17:03 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 08:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 11:04 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 19:13 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 20:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-06 17:18 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-07 07:57 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-07-10 11:33 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-10 17:23 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-07 02:15 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:42 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 19:42 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-06 02:21 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-05 21:29 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:31 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 07:50 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 10:24 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-02 17:05 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-02 19:34 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-02 20:28 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-02 22:20 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 13:28 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 16:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:16 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-05 11:37 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 15:34 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 13:36 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 09:55 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:43 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 19:35 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 07:11 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-07-03 18:03 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-03 08:38 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 06:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 09:46 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-03 08:13 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:35 -0400
Trump - was: Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-04 21:45 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-03 15:20 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:02 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-30 20:23 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:24 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-01 20:50 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-30 13:14 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-30 07:04 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:16 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-30 22:45 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-30 06:46 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-30 15:34 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-30 13:16 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-30 17:40 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-30 20:16 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-01 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:05 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-30 20:16 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-01 13:22 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:13 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-29 16:07 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-29 10:06 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 12:29 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 12:26 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 07:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 12:30 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-29 12:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-29 14:05 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 15:07 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-29 16:08 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-29 17:00 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-29 16:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-29 18:41 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-29 19:37 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-30 12:53 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:18 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-30 14:05 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-01 07:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-07-02 06:54 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-29 15:37 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-29 16:51 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-29 17:13 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-29 12:13 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-01 08:38 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-25 11:28 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:43 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-06-25 11:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 16:10 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:12 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 08:52 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 16:11 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-25 12:36 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:06 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 01:17 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-24 21:09 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 07:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-06-25 12:11 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 17:39 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-26 04:05 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 09:57 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 22:50 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 11:59 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-23 10:01 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:09 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-23 09:48 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-23 10:01 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 10:58 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 08:12 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:41 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:43 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 12:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:35 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 18:08 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-21 19:56 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:04 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 21:39 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 08:58 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 17:34 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 13:49 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-22 21:57 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 04:29 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-23 11:26 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-22 00:13 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:08 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 08:52 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:11 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 00:46 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:47 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-22 19:20 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:13 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 12:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:37 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-22 09:19 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:26 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-22 16:23 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 12:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-22 22:02 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:35 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 00:46 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-21 01:06 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 04:12 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-21 11:32 +0200
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 11:00 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-21 17:40 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 16:18 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 16:29 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 20:13 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 21:14 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-21 20:49 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-21 12:49 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 16:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:37 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 06:34 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 20:12 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-21 10:15 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 06:44 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-21 15:41 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 08:07 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-21 17:35 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-21 12:46 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 16:27 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-06-22 22:35 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 21:11 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 09:04 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:39 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 12:17 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 14:07 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 15:57 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 21:34 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:14 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-01 20:06 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 11:30 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:25 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 19:46 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 18:47 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 09:02 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 09:37 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-22 16:35 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 14:05 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 00:46 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 21:47 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-22 21:21 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-22 20:55 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:30 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-23 06:01 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:25 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:15 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:07 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-23 14:15 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 10:29 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-23 11:33 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-23 15:57 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-23 13:50 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-23 15:55 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-23 20:33 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-24 06:46 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-24 12:03 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-24 11:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-24 16:08 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 14:39 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:48 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-06-24 07:18 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-24 12:21 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-24 10:10 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 09:32 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 11:03 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 22:51 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-24 16:30 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 09:51 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-24 22:47 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-24 22:02 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-25 10:18 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-23 18:50 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:39 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-24 15:41 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-24 19:49 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-25 08:58 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-24 11:40 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 17:37 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-21 06:54 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-21 10:57 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-21 06:49 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:33 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 18:05 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 20:07 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 22:37 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 04:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 14:02 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-22 13:47 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 00:46 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-23 06:42 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-23 05:59 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 04:31 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-23 09:12 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-06-23 11:11 -0500
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-23 07:39 +0100
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-21 14:13 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:12 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-16 21:39 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 14:37 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 19:35 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:02 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-16 14:51 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-16 13:06 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:38 +0000
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 08:07 -0400
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-17 14:34 -0700
Re: "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 13:00 +0000
Page 2 of 27 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 27 Next page →
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 09:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnma0jc.1nk.mausg@Smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #165434 |
On 2016-06-17, mausg@mail.com <mausg@mail.com> wrote: > On 2016-06-17, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >> >> >>> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen >>> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in >>> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would >>> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for >>> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos >>> becomes most bombed country in the world >> >> Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried >> for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and >> figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as >> well as keeping the crews safe. >> >> He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to >> defeat the enemy by the means available. >> >> As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value >> of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in >> shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) >> is tough to say. >> >> Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, >> but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the >> leaders. >> >> I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and >> steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as >> critical to the war effect. >> >> The flip side is that the enemy had aggressive anti-aircraft >> defenses, and some raids were very costly in terms of air crews. >> > > There were several long range raids on the Rumanian oil fields at > Ploetsi(sp?) but there were large amounts of oil still going to Germany > till the Soviets took over that country. As to steel mills, the raids > on the Ruhr did not stop steel production. There were raids on the > ball-bearing factories in Eastern Germany in 1943, the bombers flying > on to Italy, for reasons of range, which resulted in heavy losses to > the US bombers involved. > > Just checked Wilipedia, The ball-bearing plant was at Schweinfurt, which could be defined as being in Western Germany, and could be defined as an example of how useless heavy bombing was. That Wikipedia article also shows that a major propaganda effort was put in motion to hide the costs/benefits failure of heavy bombing. -- greymaus.ireland.ie . . ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 11:49 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <72if3d-c5d.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #165462 |
In article <slrnnma0jc.1nk.mausg@Smaus.org>, <mausg@mail.com> wrote: >On 2016-06-17, mausg@mail.com <mausg@mail.com> wrote: >> On 2016-06-17, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >>> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >>> >>> >>>> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen >>>> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in >>>> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would >>>> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for >>>> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos >>>> becomes most bombed country in the world >>> >>> Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried >>> for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and >>> figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as >>> well as keeping the crews safe. >>> >>> He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to >>> defeat the enemy by the means available. >>> >>> As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value >>> of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in >>> shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) >>> is tough to say. >>> >>> Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, >>> but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the >>> leaders. >>> >>> I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and >>> steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as >>> critical to the war effect. >>> >>> The flip side is that the enemy had aggressive anti-aircraft >>> defenses, and some raids were very costly in terms of air crews. >>> >> >> There were several long range raids on the Rumanian oil fields at >> Ploetsi(sp?) but there were large amounts of oil still going to Germany >> till the Soviets took over that country. As to steel mills, the raids >> on the Ruhr did not stop steel production. There were raids on the >> ball-bearing factories in Eastern Germany in 1943, the bombers flying >> on to Italy, for reasons of range, which resulted in heavy losses to >> the US bombers involved. >> >> > >Just checked Wilipedia, The ball-bearing plant was at Schweinfurt, which >could be defined as being in Western Germany, and could be defined as an >example of how useless heavy bombing was. That Wikipedia article also shows >that a major propaganda effort was put in motion to hide the costs/benefits >failure of heavy bombing. Still, Schweinefurt was a far trip from England, and implied severe losses among the planes. They hit it twice. That set the Germans back, but not catastrophically. They were, however, without cover after the second hit, and a third raid would have set them back more than a year. The managers admitted this. That would have had quite some implications for all things mechanical made in Germany at the time. However, due to the heavy losses and meagre results reported from spies inside Germany (mostly from slave labour from occupied countries) the third raid was called off. -- mrr If precision was so bad, why didn't they adapt, and go for the bridges, rail yards and ports? It would take some hammering, but sooner or later they will run out of alternatives?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 15:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnmano9.28j.mausg@Smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #165477 |
On 2016-06-18, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: > In article <slrnnma0jc.1nk.mausg@Smaus.org>, <mausg@mail.com> wrote: >>On 2016-06-17, mausg@mail.com <mausg@mail.com> wrote: >> >>Just checked Wilipedia, The ball-bearing plant was at Schweinfurt, which >>could be defined as being in Western Germany, and could be defined as an >>example of how useless heavy bombing was. That Wikipedia article also shows >>that a major propaganda effort was put in motion to hide the costs/benefits >>failure of heavy bombing. > > Still, Schweinefurt was a far trip from England, and implied severe losses > among the planes. They hit it twice. That set the Germans back, but not > catastrophically. They were, however, without cover after the second hit, > and a third raid would have set them back more than a year. The managers > admitted this. That would have had quite some implications for all things > mechanical made in Germany at the time. > > However, due to the heavy losses and meagre results reported from spies > inside Germany (mostly from slave labour from occupied countries) the third > raid was called off. > > -- mrr > > If precision was so bad, why didn't they adapt, and go for the bridges, > rail yards and ports? It would take some hammering, but sooner or later they > will run out of alternatives? There is a famous picture taken from the air, of a bridge in Northern France, surrounded by craters, which was eventuall taken out by skilled pilots of the `Dambusters' squadron. The issue was still relevent during the Vietnam war, with b-62s bombing the trails from North Vietnam through Laos and Cambodia, to south Vietnam which were innefective. One Vietnamese commander claimed later, thet they realized that the US was depending on devices that detected ammonia fumes, from urine, and the Viets put Coke bottles of urine all along the areas that they didn't need. -- greymaus.ireland.ie . . ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 19:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87d1mweqoo.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #165510 |
mausg@mail.com writes: > There is a famous picture taken from the air, of a bridge in Northern > France, surrounded by craters, which was eventuall taken out by skilled > pilots of the `Dambusters' squadron. The issue was still relevent during > the Vietnam war, with b-62s bombing the trails from North Vietnam through > Laos and Cambodia, to south Vietnam which were innefective. One Vietnamese > commander claimed later, thet they realized that the US was depending on > devices that detected ammonia fumes, from urine, and the Viets put Coke > bottles of urine all along the areas that they didn't need. re: http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#82 "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#88 "Computer & Automation" later issues--anti-establishment thrust strategic bombing from 5-6miles up were so ineffective (even with Norden sights), may have been motivation for fire bombing cities ... since it was almost impossible to miss a city with fire bomb. McNamara (LeMay's staff) planning the german and japanese city firebombing ... then comes back as SECDEF for Vietnam. Boyd's story was that he was very vocal about bombing the trails wouldn't work ... was then put in command of "spook base" (possibly as punishment). "Spook base" reference gone 404 ... but lives on at wayback machine: http://web.archive.org/web/20030212092342/http://home.att.net/~c.jeppeson/igloo_white.html Boyd biography claims that "spook base" was $2.5B windfall for IBM (in 1970 dollars). Somebody claims that state department totalled up the number of trucks that DOD claimed destroyed by bombing on the trails ... exceeded the number of trucks in all of SE Asia. Note also the bombing makes Laos the most bombed country in the world http://legaciesofwar.org/about-laos/secret-war-laos/ and http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/03/laos-vietnam-war-us-bombing-uxo In between, USAF produced the (fabricated) "bombing gap" analysis for Eisenhower ... that Soviets had large numbers of advanced bombers and was used to justify responding by US building enormous numbers of advanced bombers (huge increase in DOD budget for USAF). A key thing to remember about the U2 flts was that they supplied Eisenhower with the information debunking the USAF analysis (possibly also major motivation behind Eisenhower warning about the military-industrial complex in his goodby speech). Boyd had another story about USAF in Vietnam concerning USAF (and military-industrial) budget. Before Vietnam, Boyd was asked to review the new USAF air-to-air missile. They showed him lots of details where it hit every time. He predicted it would be lucky to hit 10% of the time. They said that can't be true. He asked what kind of guidence, they said heat seaking. He asked what kind of heat seaking, and eventually got them to say "pin-point". He then asked where is the hotest part of jet fighter. They said the engine ... he said no, it is in the plume some 30yrds behind the jet (the only time it would hit is with shot straight up the tail pipe). Roll forward to vietnam and Boyd is correct. One day, the USAF one-star in Vietnam grounds all fighters and switches them to (navy) sidewinders which had better than twice the hit rate. The general last three months before pulled out to the Pentagon. He is told that he is reducing USAF budget (not using USAF missiles, loosing less USAF fighters) .... but worst of all he is increasing the Navy's budget share (for many in the pentagon, Vietnam only existed to the extent that it affected their money). posts & web URLs referencing Boyd http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subboyd.html -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 17:32 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <M8edncSRu5Aa6vjKnZ2dnUU78enNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #165477 |
On 18/06/2016 10:49, Morten Reistad wrote:
{snip}
> If precision was so bad, why didn't they adapt, and go for the bridges,
> rail yards and ports? It would take some hammering, but sooner or later they
> will run out of alternatives?
Bridges may be very long but they are very thin. This makes them hard to
hit. Even harder if you have to hit the supports. In practice laser
guidance is needed to stop the bomb being blown off target by the wind.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 19:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31cf9e26c7be5dc598a28a@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #165477 |
In article <72if3d-c5d.ln1@sambook.reistad.name>, first@last.name.invalid says... > > In article <slrnnma0jc.1nk.mausg@Smaus.org>, <mausg@mail.com> wrote: > >On 2016-06-17, mausg@mail.com <mausg@mail.com> wrote: > >> On 2016-06-17, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > >>> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen > >>>> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in > >>>> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would > >>>> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for > >>>> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos > >>>> becomes most bombed country in the world > >>> > >>> Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried > >>> for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and > >>> figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as > >>> well as keeping the crews safe. > >>> > >>> He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to > >>> defeat the enemy by the means available. > >>> > >>> As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value > >>> of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in > >>> shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) > >>> is tough to say. > >>> > >>> Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, > >>> but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the > >>> leaders. > >>> > >>> I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and > >>> steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as > >>> critical to the war effect. > >>> > >>> The flip side is that the enemy had aggressive anti-aircraft > >>> defenses, and some raids were very costly in terms of air crews. > >>> > >> > >> There were several long range raids on the Rumanian oil fields at > >> Ploetsi(sp?) but there were large amounts of oil still going to Germany > >> till the Soviets took over that country. As to steel mills, the raids > >> on the Ruhr did not stop steel production. There were raids on the > >> ball-bearing factories in Eastern Germany in 1943, the bombers flying > >> on to Italy, for reasons of range, which resulted in heavy losses to > >> the US bombers involved. > >> > >> > > > >Just checked Wilipedia, The ball-bearing plant was at Schweinfurt, which > >could be defined as being in Western Germany, and could be defined as an > >example of how useless heavy bombing was. That Wikipedia article also shows > >that a major propaganda effort was put in motion to hide the costs/benefits > >failure of heavy bombing. > > Still, Schweinefurt was a far trip from England, and implied severe losses > among the planes. They hit it twice. That set the Germans back, but not > catastrophically. They were, however, without cover after the second hit, > and a third raid would have set them back more than a year. The managers > admitted this. That would have had quite some implications for all things > mechanical made in Germany at the time. > > However, due to the heavy losses and meagre results reported from spies > inside Germany (mostly from slave labour from occupied countries) the third > raid was called off. > > -- mrr > > If precision was so bad, why didn't they adapt, and go for the bridges, > rail yards and ports? It would take some hammering, but sooner or later they > will run out of alternatives? They did go for those. Bombing Germany was a 24 hour 7 day a week operation with thousands of American and British aircraft. They didn't just fly three raids on a ball-bearing works and decide to end of the bombing activity for the rest of the war.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 16:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <b0r8mbh191uqvu7fep9dsbg1n5m48pnef6@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #165433 |
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:11:13 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > > >> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen >> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in >> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would >> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for >> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos >> becomes most bombed country in the world > >Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried >for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and >figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as >well as keeping the crews safe. > >He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to >defeat the enemy by the means available. > >As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value >of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in >shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) >is tough to say. > >Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, >but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the >leaders. > >I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and >steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as >critical to the war effect. > >The flip side is that the enemy had aggressive anti-aircraft >defenses, and some raids were very costly in terms of air crews. The problem was accuracy. The British government wanted to check on 'Bomber' Harris' claims. The investigation showed that as little as 5 percent of the bombs dropped came within 25 mles of the target factories. The Norden bombsight was developed for bombing in the clear dry skies over Arizona and New Mexico. Europe desn't have that kind of climate. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 17:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kv6dnaQRhr-l6vnKnZ2dnUU7-dGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #165433 |
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, > but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the > leaders. > > I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and > steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as > critical to the war effect. Well, I have not seen the pictures myself, but it has been said many times that after many of these fire bombing raids, they took recon photos the next day, and you'd see rows of lathes and other machine tools standing amid the ashes. So, the Japanese apparently put a lot of small parts manufacturing into people's houses. Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 19:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <378818668.487900209.079010.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #165433 |
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > > >> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen >> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in >> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would >> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for >> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos >> becomes most bombed country in the world > > Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried > for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and > figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as > well as keeping the crews safe. > > He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to > defeat the enemy by the means available. > > As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value > of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in > shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) > is tough to say. > > Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, > but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the > leaders. > > I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and > steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as > critical to the war effect. I understand they (we) did, but it was pretty ineffectual. Most bombs missed their targets. Damage to railroads, for example, it would seem could be pretty quickly repaired. The Germans moved lot of manufacturing to bombproof underground facilities. I forget the detail, but as I recall some rates of production were still increasing even at the end of the war. > > The flip side is that the enemy had aggressive anti-aircraft > defenses, and some raids were very costly in terms of air crews. > > -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 00:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nk25np01d0j@news3.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #165445 |
On 2016-06-17, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > The Germans moved lot of manufacturing to bombproof underground facilities. FSVO "bombproof". The RAF's 12,000-pound "Tallboy" and their 22,000-pound "Grand Slam" cracked some mighty strong bunkers. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 15:48 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <8qcbmbtuahrm5ehnh3po7o3qtjk1qai7cl@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #165448 |
On 18 Jun 2016 00:47:53 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: >On 2016-06-17, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> The Germans moved lot of manufacturing to bombproof underground facilities. > >FSVO "bombproof". The RAF's 12,000-pound "Tallboy" and their 22,000-pound >"Grand Slam" cracked some mighty strong bunkers. But they didn't have those at first. The elder Kennedy, JFK's older brother, died during an experiment of using old B-17s loaded with explosives to take out those underground bunkers. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 15:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <4acbmb5evhrdogmj0j51ua9i1dgo7qe29p@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #165445 |
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 19:54:10 -0400, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: ><hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >> >> >>> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen >>> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in >>> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would >>> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for >>> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos >>> becomes most bombed country in the world >> >> Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried >> for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and >> figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as >> well as keeping the crews safe. >> >> He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to >> defeat the enemy by the means available. >> >> As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value >> of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in >> shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) >> is tough to say. >> >> Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, >> but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the >> leaders. >> >> I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and >> steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as >> critical to the war effect. > >I understand they (we) did, but it was pretty ineffectual. Most bombs >missed their targets. Damage to railroads, for example, it would seem >could be pretty quickly repaired. The Germans moved lot of manufacturing >to bombproof underground facilities. I forget the detail, but as I recall >some rates of production were still increasing even at the end of the war. They had special rail repair groups. A locomotive with cars carrying people, spare rails, spare ties, cranes, etc. Repairs happened much more rapidly than the Bomber leaders realized would happen. They started doing piece work in small machine shops scattered all over Germany. Production of war material did go up, but the Axis never sped up production like the US did. The US made an all out effort to produce war materials. Before WW2, the US baely produced ammo, as an example, but after the war got them involved they were turning out millions of rounds of just rifle ammo per month, millions of rounds of machine gun ammo, etc. If you read Wheezers and Dodgers, about British scientists who came up with the hedgehog to battle U-Boats, and other items, the author pointed out how quickly the US war produciton got started and were amazed at the amounts of war items like guns and ammo were made. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 22:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1606182238520.3725@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #165546 |
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016, JimP wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 19:54:10 -0400, Peter Flass > <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >>> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: >>> >>> >>>> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen >>>> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in >>>> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would >>>> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for >>>> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos >>>> becomes most bombed country in the world >>> >>> Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried >>> for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and >>> figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as >>> well as keeping the crews safe. >>> >>> He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to >>> defeat the enemy by the means available. >>> >>> As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value >>> of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in >>> shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) >>> is tough to say. >>> >>> Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, >>> but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the >>> leaders. >>> >>> I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and >>> steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as >>> critical to the war effect. >> >> I understand they (we) did, but it was pretty ineffectual. Most bombs >> missed their targets. Damage to railroads, for example, it would seem >> could be pretty quickly repaired. The Germans moved lot of manufacturing >> to bombproof underground facilities. I forget the detail, but as I recall >> some rates of production were still increasing even at the end of the war. > > They had special rail repair groups. A locomotive with cars carrying > people, spare rails, spare ties, cranes, etc. Repairs happened much > more rapidly than the Bomber leaders realized would happen. > > They started doing piece work in small machine shops scattered all > over Germany. Production of war material did go up, but the Axis never > sped up production like the US did. The US made an all out effort to > produce war materials. Before WW2, the US baely produced ammo, as an > example, but after the war got them involved they were turning out > millions of rounds of just rifle ammo per month, millions of rounds of > machine gun ammo, etc. > > If you read Wheezers and Dodgers, about British scientists who came up > with the hedgehog to battle U-Boats, and other items, the author > pointed out how quickly the US war produciton got started and were > amazed at the amounts of war items like guns and ammo were made. > ANd we see that later, all the surplus left over. I've said it before, in 1972 I could get a Command Set transmitter for ten dollars here in Canada, and it was in packing so I don't think it was ever used. Those leftovers fueled the electronic industry, hobby are certainly, for a long time, and while some of it was used, I think much of it didn't see combat.There was so much, once things got up to speed, that it took decades for the stuff to disappear. Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-19 05:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31d02a73d0ec30cb98a28b@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #165565 |
In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1606182238520.3725@darkstar.example.org>, et472@ncf.ca says... > > On Sat, 18 Jun 2016, JimP wrote: > > > On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 19:54:10 -0400, Peter Flass > > <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > >>> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:08:57 PM UTC-4, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>> mcnamara was LaMay's staff planning the fire bombing of half dozen > >>>> german cities and then fire bombing 67 japanese cities (years later in > >>>> interview, he quotes lamay as saying if US had lost the war, they would > >>>> have been prosecuted for war crimes). after ww2, mcnamara leaves for > >>>> auto industry but comes back as SECDEF for vietnam ... where Laos > >>>> becomes most bombed country in the world > >>> > >>> Yes, LaMay in his memoir clearly says he would've been tried > >>> for war crimes for the firebombing raids. He too sat down and > >>> figured out how to make the raids as destructive as possible, as > >>> well as keeping the crews safe. > >>> > >>> He still defends his actions, saying it was war and they had to > >>> defeat the enemy by the means available. > >>> > >>> As mentioned, the US air corps passionately believed in the value > >>> of strategic bombing in WW II. How effective it actually was in > >>> shortening the war (by making it harder for the enemy to fight) > >>> is tough to say. > >>> > >>> Sadly, such bombing of both Japan and Germany killed a lot of people, > >>> but since both were cruel dictatorships, it made no difference to the > >>> leaders. > >>> > >>> I do wonder if the Allies bombed things like oil refineries and > >>> steel mills, which should've been prominent targets as well as > >>> critical to the war effect. > >> > >> I understand they (we) did, but it was pretty ineffectual. Most bombs > >> missed their targets. Damage to railroads, for example, it would seem > >> could be pretty quickly repaired. The Germans moved lot of manufacturing > >> to bombproof underground facilities. I forget the detail, but as I recall > >> some rates of production were still increasing even at the end of the war. > > > > They had special rail repair groups. A locomotive with cars carrying > > people, spare rails, spare ties, cranes, etc. Repairs happened much > > more rapidly than the Bomber leaders realized would happen. > > > > They started doing piece work in small machine shops scattered all > > over Germany. Production of war material did go up, but the Axis never > > sped up production like the US did. The US made an all out effort to > > produce war materials. Before WW2, the US baely produced ammo, as an > > example, but after the war got them involved they were turning out > > millions of rounds of just rifle ammo per month, millions of rounds of > > machine gun ammo, etc. > > > > If you read Wheezers and Dodgers, about British scientists who came up > > with the hedgehog to battle U-Boats, and other items, the author > > pointed out how quickly the US war produciton got started and were > > amazed at the amounts of war items like guns and ammo were made. > > > ANd we see that later, all the surplus left over. I've said it before, in > 1972 I could get a Command Set transmitter for ten dollars here in Canada, > and it was in packing so I don't think it was ever used. Those leftovers > fueled the electronic industry, hobby are certainly, for a long time, and > while some of it was used, I think much of it didn't see combat.There was > so much, once things got up to speed, that it took decades for the stuff > to disappear. One of my college professors owned a P-51 Mustang that he bought right after the war with the money he'd saved during the war. He finally sold it for vastly more than he paid for it when the parts supply had been drawn down to a point where he couldn't afford the maintenance anymore. That sort of thing was not uncommon. > > Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-20 13:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <60f808d9-d8a4-4b0b-8fae-949c2c6ea12b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #165565 |
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 10:39:44 PM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote: > > If you read Wheezers and Dodgers, about British scientists who came up > > with the hedgehog to battle U-Boats, and other items, the author > > pointed out how quickly the US war produciton got started and were > > amazed at the amounts of war items like guns and ammo were made. > > > ANd we see that later, all the surplus left over. I've said it before, in > 1972 I could get a Command Set transmitter for ten dollars here in Canada, > and it was in packing so I don't think it was ever used. Those leftovers > fueled the electronic industry, hobby are certainly, for a long time, and > while some of it was used, I think much of it didn't see combat.There was > so much, once things got up to speed, that it took decades for the stuff > to disappear. They produced about 10,000 C-47's (DC-3's), and a great many were available surplus after the war. Secondary regional carriers and freight haulers snapped them up. The US govt had built or upgraded many airfields nation wide, and these became regional airports. Plenty of wartime pilots worked at regional or freight haulers. All of this helped grow the US aviation business. In the meantime, the railroads were stuck with a war-exhausted physical plant and high taxes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-01 19:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <878txkeq7e.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #165640 |
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: > They produced about 10,000 C-47's (DC-3's), and a great many were > available surplus after the war. Secondary regional carriers and > freight haulers snapped them up. The US govt had built or upgraded > many airfields nation wide, and these became regional airports. > Plenty of wartime pilots worked at regional or freight haulers. > > All of this helped grow the US aviation business. In the meantime, > the railroads were stuck with a war-exhausted physical plant and > high taxes. The 100th c-47 sent to chinese ... after the war knocked around the world for a while before being picked up by Johnson & Johnson and refurbished for senior executive plane ... under contract with Pan Am to operate (it shows up in air shows still flying). -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 02:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <njvnci126i9@news6.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #165335 |
On 2016-06-16, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> Lately, I've been reading about the Vietnam War, especially the
> early years. As mentioned, I recommend Haberstram's "The Best
> and the Brightest".
>
> Anyway, the defense business certainly did make a ton of money
> off the war. However, I do not hold them accountable for it.
> The government asked them to do a job, and they did it.
>
> I blame the high-ups in government, the people who had access
> to the facts and deliberately hid them from the people. This would
> include McNamara, Gen. Paul Harkins, Gen. Maxwell Taylor, LBJ,
> and JFK, among others.
I been Norman Mailered, Maxwell Taylored
I been John O'Hara'd, McNamara'd
I been Rolling Stoned and Beatled till I'm blind
I been Ayn Randed, nearly branded
A Communist 'cause I'm left-handed
That's the hand I use... well, never mind
-- Paul Simon: A Simple Desultory Philippic
(or How I was Robert McNamara'd into Submission)
One of the best Dylan parodies ever made...
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 22:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <njv5j4$b01$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165325 |
"Al Kossow" <aek@bitsavers.org> wrote in message news:njuokr$ouj$2@dont-email.me... > > In 1972 ACM honored Berkeley as its singular founder at its 25th > anniversary dinner. His acceptance speech was a direct > denunciation of those in computing who worked on the killing devices used > in the Vietnam War, or computing companies > that made such horrors, Sounds like a 100% decent guy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-20 13:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0c687419-300a-4369-a878-9c7e1c8ab5c1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #165325 |
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 1:46:04 PM UTC-4, Al Kossow wrote: > In 1972 ACM honored Berkeley as its singular founder at its 25th anniversary dinner. His acceptance speech was a direct > denunciation of those in computing who worked on the killing devices used in the Vietnam War, or computing companies > that made such horrors, and of ACM for ignoring this immorality. He said that it was a "gross neglect of responsibility" > that ACM was not investigating whether computer applications were good or evil and how computers could be used to > increase the good of society. Several prominent ACM members, employees of the firms and government military agencies > that Berkeley had pointed to, ostentatiously walked out of the banquet room while he was speaking. The leaders of ACM > were clearly embarrassed by their honoree, and ACM never publicly referred to his speech in any way. I'm not sure how I would've reacted in 1972 if I had heard about that speech. By 1972 I was anti-war, plus I didn't care for defense contractors. However, I also knew a lot of everyday people, who were apolitical techie types, working for such firms. To them, it was a job, nothing more or less. People had families they had to support, it wasn't so simple for someone with a spouse, kids, and a mortgage to just walk away from a job out of protest. Nor was it so simple for a business person to walk away from a government contract-- that would mean laying off workers and causing hardship. One other comment, if I may. In my humble opinion, the anti-war movement in the U.S. did a terrible job communicating its position. To a great many of us, they had zero credibility. They seemed to be in "outer space" with many of their positions, shrill, and anti- establishment in all sorts of ways. People like Jane Fonda wrapping herself around North Vietnam was collusion with the enemy. A lot of young people who got involved with the "movement" were doing so for personal reasons--guys were looking to get laid, girls were looking for some vague social justice, without really knowing what the issues were truly about. Also, the anti-war movement often painted the communists as good people. That was obviously not true, and later the "boat people" and mass shootings proved it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-20 19:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nk9v9s$1om$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165642 |
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: > On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 1:46:04 PM UTC-4, Al Kossow wrote: > >> In 1972 ACM honored Berkeley as its singular founder at its 25th >> anniversary dinner. His acceptance speech was a direct denunciation >> of those in computing who worked on the killing devices used in the >> Vietnam War, or computing companies that made such horrors, and of >> ACM for ignoring this immorality. He said that it was a "gross >> neglect of responsibility" that ACM was not investigating whether >> computer applications were good or evil and how computers could be >> used to increase the good of society. Several prominent ACM members, >> employees of the firms and government military agencies that Berkeley >> had pointed to, ostentatiously walked out of the banquet room while >> he was speaking. The leaders of ACM were clearly embarrassed by their >> honoree, and ACM never publicly referred to his speech in any way. > > I'm not sure how I would've reacted in 1972 if I had heard about that > speech. By 1972 I was anti-war, plus I didn't care for defense > contractors. > > However, I also knew a lot of everyday people, who were apolitical > techie types, working for such firms. To them, it was a job, nothing > more or less. People had families they had to support, it wasn't so > simple for someone with a spouse, kids, and a mortgage to just walk > away from a job out of protest. Nor was it so simple for a business > person to walk away from a government contract-- that would mean > laying off workers and causing hardship. > > One other comment, if I may. In my humble opinion, the anti-war > movement in the U.S. did a terrible job communicating its position. > To a great many of us, they had zero credibility. They seemed to be > in "outer space" with many of their positions, shrill, and anti- > establishment in all sorts of ways. People like Jane Fonda wrapping > herself around North Vietnam was collusion with the enemy. A lot of > young people who got involved with the "movement" were doing so for > personal reasons--guys were looking to get laid, girls were looking > for some vague social justice, without really knowing what the issues > were truly about. > > Also, the anti-war movement often painted the communists as good > people. That was obviously not true, and later the "boat people" and > mass shootings proved it. You speak like you would expect the anti-war movement to be organized and speak with one voice. There never was any mechanism for something like that. There was some risk for the protesters, I don't think the "getting laid" comment is fair. That's a common motivation, but I doubt that was a significant driver. Being against the war caused some family strife too. Looking back, I think most of us agree the war was wrong. Therefore, the protesters were mostly right. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 27 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 27 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web