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 25 of 27 — ← Prev page 1 … 23 24 [25] 26 27 Next page →
| From | "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 17:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nkjo96$p6b$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165889 |
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:2117073843.488476173.712555.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... >> >> What of the early foetal development where the foetus >> is indistinguishable from those of many other mammals? >> > > Doesn't matter, the baby could become a future Einstein or Scott > Fitzgerald Or a Hitler or a Peter Flass?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 07:18 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nkj4tp$928$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #165866 |
On 2016-06-24 6:46 AM, Peter Flass wrote: > Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: >>> >>> Not really, PP is a pretty easy target by itself. I agree with a lot of >>> its goals, but its forced coupling of birth control to abortion is >>> offensive. If they separated the two I doubt anyone but a few religious >>> nuts would object to PP. Notice they never mention the word "abortion", >>> they always talk about "a woman's right to choose", as if they're talking >>> about a choice between chocolate and vanilla, not between choosing to kill >>> their child or let it live. >> >> It's the couple involved's choice, not yours. Mind your own business and the world will >> be a better place. You, personally, are free to not ever have or advocate >> an abortion. How dare you presume to apply your beliefs to anyone else? >> > > No, the baby is a _living human being_, and has a right to live which > should trump someone's convenience. I'm not saying abortion is always > wrong, any more than capital punishment or war is always wrong, but it > should be severely restricted in the knowledge that you're killing a person > who, unlike a convicted murderer, did't even do anything wrong. I knew I > was going to get flak for this, but your comment is typical of something > PP people would day, which is why I'm so opposed to them. > But the second amendment is more important than mass shootings.... w..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 12:21 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20160624122143.4b61c4d136562b1b9dc74832@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #165866 |
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 06:46:31 -0400 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: > > It's the couple involved's choice, not yours. Mind your own business > > and the world will be a better place. You, personally, are free to not > > ever have or advocate an abortion. How dare you presume to apply your > > beliefs to anyone else? > > > > No, the baby is a _living human being_, and has a right to live which > should trump someone's convenience. I'm not saying abortion is always I've rarely heard anyone dispute this, one common dispute around abortion centres on when does the fetus become a living human being, another centres around the extent to which the wellbeing of the mother trumps that of the baby or vice-versa. These are not trivial questions, there are no clearly correct answers but there are a lot of very strongly held opinions. There is I believe general agreement that the first is somewhere between the fusion of sperm and ova (although religious prohibitions on contraception might be construed as putting it even earlier) and the cutting of the chord (although the old practice of exposing babies might be construed as putting it even later). The latter is also contentious. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 10:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nkjf17$lhs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165866 |
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: >>> >>> Not really, PP is a pretty easy target by itself. I agree with a >>> lot of its goals, but its forced coupling of birth control to >>> abortion is offensive. If they separated the two I doubt anyone but >>> a few religious nuts would object to PP. Notice they never mention >>> the word "abortion", they always talk about "a woman's right to >>> choose", as if they're talking about a choice between chocolate and >>> vanilla, not between choosing to kill their child or let it live. >> >> It's the couple involved's choice, not yours. Mind your own business >> and the world will be a better place. You, personally, are free to >> not ever have or advocate an abortion. How dare you presume to apply >> your beliefs to anyone else? >> > > No, the baby is a _living human being_, and has a right to live > which... Just a while ago, it was a child. Now it's a baby. Can't you use the right word? It's a fetus. Totally dependent on the mother to survive to babyhood. You're chocolate/vanilla comment was about the right words, but your descriptions are full of emotionally distorting words. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 09:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <u0hqmbd1jni3tcl3u0vssh2182vveh5epn@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #165880 |
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 10:10:47 -0400, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > >> Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: >>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >>>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: >>>> >>>> Not really, PP is a pretty easy target by itself. I agree with a >>>> lot of its goals, but its forced coupling of birth control to >>>> abortion is offensive. If they separated the two I doubt anyone but >>>> a few religious nuts would object to PP. Notice they never mention >>>> the word "abortion", they always talk about "a woman's right to >>>> choose", as if they're talking about a choice between chocolate and >>>> vanilla, not between choosing to kill their child or let it live. >>> >>> It's the couple involved's choice, not yours. Mind your own business >>> and the world will be a better place. You, personally, are free to >>> not ever have or advocate an abortion. How dare you presume to apply >>> your beliefs to anyone else? >>> >> >> No, the baby is a _living human being_, and has a right to live >> which... > >Just a while ago, it was a child. Now it's a baby. Can't you use the >right word? It's a fetus. Totally dependent on the mother to survive >to babyhood. > >You're chocolate/vanilla comment was about the right words, but your >descriptions are full of emotionally distorting words. And I doubt he has ever been pregnant. He and others act like its one thing, when its really about women being treated as human beings or baby factories. In other words, women being treated like dogs at a puppy mill. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 11:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <95d90cd7-e97b-4c61-a5f8-6cc736190438@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #165880 |
On Friday, June 24, 2016 at 8:10:49 AM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote: > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > > No, the baby is a _living human being_, and has a right to live > > which... > Just a while ago, it was a child. Now it's a baby. Can't you use the > right word? It's a fetus. Totally dependent on the mother to survive > to babyhood. > You're chocolate/vanilla comment was about the right words, but your > descriptions are full of emotionally distorting words. Like it's an "emotionally distorting word" to call a slave on a Southern cotton plantation a human being? I'd say it's stating the facts. A human fetus _is_ a human being. And a baby. And a child. It is a human being; it is a child because it is not an adult, and it is a baby because it's not old enough to talk or walk upright. Some people mistakenly think that the child's dependency on its mother changes its status. But that's silly. If an intruder goes into a hospital, and unplugs someone from a heart-lung machine, we don't say that it isn't murder because if you're dependent you can't be a human being. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 22:51 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31d7bbc5efea2eba98a2bb@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #165903 |
In article <95d90cd7-e97b-4c61-a5f8-6cc736190438@googlegroups.com>, jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... > > On Friday, June 24, 2016 at 8:10:49 AM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote: > > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > > > > No, the baby is a _living human being_, and has a right to live > > > which... > > > Just a while ago, it was a child. Now it's a baby. Can't you use the > > right word? It's a fetus. Totally dependent on the mother to survive > > to babyhood. > > > You're chocolate/vanilla comment was about the right words, but your > > descriptions are full of emotionally distorting words. > > Like it's an "emotionally distorting word" to call a slave on a Southern cotton > plantation a human being? I'd say it's stating the facts. > > A human fetus _is_ a human being. And a baby. And a child. It is a human being; > it is a child because it is not an adult, and it is a baby because it's not old > enough to talk or walk upright. > > Some people mistakenly think that the child's dependency on its mother changes > its status. > > But that's silly. If an intruder goes into a hospital, and unplugs someone from > a heart-lung machine, we don't say that it isn't murder because if you're > dependent you can't be a human being. 99.9 percent of vat-girls say you're full of crap. If men got pregnant abortion would be a sacrament.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00053619C1BD8CF7@aca41cce.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #165903 |
Quadibloc wrote: > On Friday, June 24, 2016 at 8:10:49 AM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote: >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > >> > No, the baby is a _living human being_, and has a right to live >> > which... > >> Just a while ago, it was a child. Now it's a baby. Can't you use the >> right word? It's a fetus. Totally dependent on the mother to survive >> to babyhood. > >> You're chocolate/vanilla comment was about the right words, but your >> descriptions are full of emotionally distorting words. > > Like it's an "emotionally distorting word" to call a slave on a Southern cotton > plantation a human being? I'd say it's stating the facts. > > A human fetus _is_ a human being. No, it's a parasite. > And a baby. And a child. It is a human being; > it is a child because it is not an adult, and it is a baby because it's not old > enough to talk or walk upright. Be very careful. If it becomes a legal human being, then it will have rights equal to its parents. That implies the ability to counter any decisions the parents make. Since this so-called human being cannot communicate with anyone other than the mother, the government will assign its proxy to a representative other than the parents. Do you really, really, really want this to happen? > > Some people mistakenly think that the child's dependency on its mother changes > its status. You need to think about this more carefully. > > But that's silly. If an intruder goes into a hospital, and unplugs someone from > a heart-lung machine, we don't say that it isn't murder because if you're > dependent you can't be a human being. This is a smokey argument. ARe you really willing to have the government "own" your sperm and tell you how, when and where you distribute it? Spilling even one sperm would become an act of murder because the act killed a future human being. This is becoming part of the rabid anti-abortionists platform. There is even support in the Bible for it about this form of birth control a sin. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 16:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dt55grFuaeqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #165866 |
On 2016-06-24, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>>>
>>> Not really, PP is a pretty easy target by itself. I agree with a lot of
>>> its goals, but its forced coupling of birth control to abortion is
>>> offensive. If they separated the two I doubt anyone but a few religious
>>> nuts would object to PP. Notice they never mention the word "abortion",
>>> they always talk about "a woman's right to choose", as if they're talking
>>> about a choice between chocolate and vanilla, not between choosing to kill
>>> their child or let it live.
>>
>> It's the couple involved's choice, not yours. Mind your own business and the world will
>> be a better place. You, personally, are free to not ever have or advocate
>> an abortion. How dare you presume to apply your beliefs to anyone else?
>>
>
> No, the baby is
A foetus is not a "baby".
--
Today is Setting Orange, the 29th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 09:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f86af1c2-87a0-492e-b9f9-c9162d3cac95@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #165861 |
On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 2:33:49 PM UTC-6, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > >Notice they never mention the word "abortion", > >they always talk about "a woman's right to choose", as if they're talking > >about a choice between chocolate and vanilla, not between choosing to kill > >their child or let it live. > It's the couple involved's choice, not yours. Mind your own business and the world will > be a better place. You, personally, are free to not ever have or advocate > an abortion. How dare you presume to apply your beliefs to anyone else? You're forgetting someone. The child with whom the woman is pregnant is also a human being. Not having been born yet is just how young the child is, which is a good reason for not letting the child vote, but it's not a good reason for depriving the child of the right to legal protection against assault and murder. It's like saying I should mind my own business, and not interfere with the ownership of slaves by Southern plantation owners. Now, if you wanted to make *reasonable* arguments for abortion choice, like pointing out how, before a certain stage of pregnancy, the embryo doesn't have any brain function present, and so it was reasonable, not discriminatory, not to regard the embryo as a person... that would be different. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 22:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31d7bada39960b7098a2b9@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #165904 |
In article <f86af1c2-87a0-492e-b9f9-c9162d3cac95@googlegroups.com>, jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... > > On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 2:33:49 PM UTC-6, Scott Lurndal wrote: > > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > > > >Notice they never mention the word "abortion", > > >they always talk about "a woman's right to choose", as if they're talking > > >about a choice between chocolate and vanilla, not between choosing to kill > > >their child or let it live. > > > It's the couple involved's choice, not yours. Mind your own business and the world will > > be a better place. You, personally, are free to not ever have or advocate > > an abortion. How dare you presume to apply your beliefs to anyone else? > > You're forgetting someone. > > The child with whom the woman is pregnant is also a human being. > > Not having been born yet is just how young the child is, which is a good reason > for not letting the child vote, but it's not a good reason for depriving the > child of the right to legal protection against assault and murder. > > It's like saying I should mind my own business, and not interfere with the > ownership of slaves by Southern plantation owners. > > Now, if you wanted to make *reasonable* arguments for abortion choice, like > pointing out how, before a certain stage of pregnancy, the embryo doesn't have > any brain function present, and so it was reasonable, not discriminatory, not > to regard the embryo as a person... that would be different. > > John Savard People of good will do not agree on abortion. That being the case the zealots on both sides should be ignored.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 22:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nkks8l$9rq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165914 |
On 6/24/2016 9:47 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > In article <f86af1c2-87a0-492e-b9f9-c9162d3cac95@googlegroups.com>, > jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >> >> On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 2:33:49 PM UTC-6, Scott Lurndal wrote: >>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>>> Notice they never mention the word "abortion", >>>> they always talk about "a woman's right to choose", as if they're talking >>>> about a choice between chocolate and vanilla, not between choosing to kill >>>> their child or let it live. >> >>> It's the couple involved's choice, not yours. Mind your own business and the world will >>> be a better place. You, personally, are free to not ever have or advocate >>> an abortion. How dare you presume to apply your beliefs to anyone else? >> >> You're forgetting someone. >> >> The child with whom the woman is pregnant is also a human being. >> >> Not having been born yet is just how young the child is, which is a good reason >> for not letting the child vote, but it's not a good reason for depriving the >> child of the right to legal protection against assault and murder. >> >> It's like saying I should mind my own business, and not interfere with the >> ownership of slaves by Southern plantation owners. >> >> Now, if you wanted to make *reasonable* arguments for abortion choice, like >> pointing out how, before a certain stage of pregnancy, the embryo doesn't have >> any brain function present, and so it was reasonable, not discriminatory, not >> to regard the embryo as a person... that would be different. >> >> John Savard > > People of good will do not agree on abortion. That being the case the > zealots on both sides should be ignored. > Exactly. Both those who want to prohibit it, and those who want to make it mandatory.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-25 10:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nkli9q$vmg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165904 |
"Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message news:f86af1c2-87a0-492e-b9f9-c9162d3cac95@googlegroups.com... > Not having been born yet is just how young the child is, which is a good > reason > for not letting the child vote, but it's not a good reason for depriving > the > child of the right to legal protection against assault and murder. The child is formed from and is part of the woman's body and it is up to her how she treats her own body. A conitnuation of the anit-abortion argument would make it wrong to excise cancers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-23 18:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nkhp2u$vlt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #165860 |
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > Not really, PP is a pretty easy target by itself. I agree with a lot of > its goals, but its forced coupling of birth control to abortion is > offensive. If they separated the two I doubt anyone but a few religious > nuts would object to PP. Notice they never mention the word "abortion", > they always talk about "a woman's right to choose", as if they're talking > about a choice between chocolate and vanilla, not between choosing to kill > their child or let it live. "Forced coupling" ... What does that mean? I'm sure they are separate things. After all, you don't need an abortion if you're taking birth control. (Unless if fails.) I really don't see what the fuss is about. (Except for people trying to outlaw all abortions.) It's a non-profit and no government contributions go to abortions. What's the problem? The right wing is making the organization into a problem that doesn't exist. (Assuming you accept the law of the land.) -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 12:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000536058436D5B1@aca41474.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #165860 |
Peter Flass wrote: > Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes: >> >>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >>>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 23 Jun 2016 14:15:01 GMT, mausg@mail.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 2016-06-22, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 5:02:06 AM UTC-4, ma...@mail.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As I've said in here before, the main differences between >>>>>>>>> communism and nazism is 1) the color of their uniforms, 2) the >>>>>>>>> reasons they use to murder millions of people. Otherwise >>>>>>>>> nutters. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The Nazis were, and are (read what AfD is about), racists. They >>>>>>>> would never have won WWII because of that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If someone is gonna shoot me because I'm a Martian, or shoot me >>>>>>> because I merely showed up on a list by random selection, it makes >>>>>>> no difference to me--I am dead. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> While racism was a motivating factor for the Nazi's, there were >>>>>>> other significant factors, too, like nationalism, and plain old >>>>>>> greed for power and money. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The Nazi's conquered and murdered millions of their fellow >>>>>>> "Aryans" who happened to be in their way. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Many of the Nazi's ideas were based on notions that were common in >>>>>> the us as well, such as casterating mental defectives, regarding >>>>>> `lesser races' as fair for experimentation. >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, they got some of their ideas from the US Eugenics socities. >>>> >>>> Including Planned Parenthood, although today they try to pretend it >>>> didn't happen. >>> >>> You've been listening to Rush & ilk again, I see. >>> >>> There is no comparing PP and Eugenics, either on goals or methods. >> >> Dare I insert a little data into the mix (Wikipedia): >> >> Margaret Sanger and eugenics Further information: Margaret Sanger § >> Eugenics >> >> In the 1920s, various theories of eugenics were popular among >> intellectuals in the United States. (For example, 75% of colleges >> offered courses on eugenics.) In her campaign to promote birth >> control, Sanger teamed with eugenics organizations such as the American >> Eugenics Society, although she argued against many of their >> positions. Scholars describe Sanger as believing that birth >> control and sterilization should be voluntary, and not based on >> race. Sanger advocated for "voluntary motherhood"—the right to >> choose when to be pregnant—for all women, as an important element of >> women's rights. As part of her efforts to promote birth >> control, however, Sanger found common cause with proponents of eugenics, >> believing that she and they both sought to "assist the race toward the >> elimination of the unfit". >> >> Critics of Planned Parenthood often refer to Sanger's connection with >> supporters of eugenics to discredit the organization by associating it, >> and birth control, with the more negative modern view of >> eugenics. Planned Parenthood has responded to this effort >> directly in a leaflet acknowledging that Sanger agreed with some of her >> contemporaries who advocated the voluntary hospitalization or >> sterilization of people with untreatable, disabling, hereditary >> conditions, and limits on the immigration of the diseased. The leaflet >> also states that Planned Parenthood "finds these views objectionable and >> outmoded" but says that it was compelled to discuss the topic because >> "anti-family planning activists continue to attack Sanger ... because >> she is an easier target" than Planned Parenthood. >> >> > > Not really, PP is a pretty easy target by itself. I agree with a lot of > its goals, but its forced coupling of birth control to abortion is > offensive. The only people who do this forced coupling are the anti-abortionists. > If they separated the two I doubt anyone but a few religious > nuts would object to PP. Notice they never mention the word "abortion", > they always talk about "a woman's right to choose", as if they're talking > about a choice between chocolate and vanilla, not between choosing to kill > their child or let it live. You, obviously, have never been in the situation. :-) There will always be abortions. If it is made illegal, then there will be an underground which will do the operation. The cost will be high because the person doing the abortion will have to charge enough to cover the costs of the bribes to police and anyone else who has a vested interest in preventing the action. Do you really want this operatioon to be illegal and unregulated? /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 15:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20160624154126.a3a2499b4bb9588312cefe3a@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #165876 |
On 24 Jun 2016 12:39:07 GMT jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: <abortion> > Do you really want this operatioon to be illegal and unregulated? That right there is the best argument for legal abortion there is. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 19:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <i7srmblje2mgm5b7t345455msr15gjaj5u@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #165882 |
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 15:41:26 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>On 24 Jun 2016 12:39:07 GMT
>jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>
><abortion>
>> Do you really want this operatioon to be illegal and unregulated?
>
> That right there is the best argument for legal abortion there is.
Also for legal assassination. And probably many other things as
well.
That it is the best argument, however, does not mean that it is a
good argument.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-25 08:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20160625085815.69ce7e52cb62d09496590031@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #165915 |
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 19:49:31 -0700 Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 15:41:26 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot > <steveo@eircom.net> wrote: > > >On 24 Jun 2016 12:39:07 GMT > >jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > > > ><abortion> > >> Do you really want this operatioon to be illegal and unregulated? > > > > That right there is the best argument for legal abortion there > > is. > > Also for legal assassination. And probably many other things as > well. Good for just about anything which is illegal, dangerous largely because it is illegal and yet is still common. Assassination fails that last, which is an important criteria. > That it is the best argument, however, does not mean that it is a > good argument. The core of the argument is "If a lot of people are doing it then it's better legal and regulated than illegal and run by criminals". Prohibition is the poster child advert for this point of view, and yes it does apply to a lot of things but assassination is not one of them. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-24 11:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnmq3hg.1a9.mausg@Smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #165854 |
On 2016-06-23, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote: > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >>JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 23 Jun 2016 14:15:01 GMT, mausg@mail.com wrote: >>> >>>> On 2016-06-22, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 5:02:06 AM UTC-4, ma...@mail.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> As I've said in here before, the main differences between communism >>>>>>> and nazism is 1) the color of their uniforms, 2) the reasons they use >>>>>>> to murder millions of people. Otherwise nutters. >>>>> >>>>>> The Nazis were, and are (read what AfD is about), racists. They would never >>>>>> have won WWII because of that. >>>>> >>>>> If someone is gonna shoot me because I'm a Martian, or shoot me >>>>> because I merely showed up on a list by random selection, it makes >>>>> no difference to me--I am dead. >>>>> >>>>> While racism was a motivating factor for the Nazi's, there were >>>>> other significant factors, too, like nationalism, and plain old >>>>> greed for power and money. >>>>> >>>>> The Nazi's conquered and murdered millions of their fellow "Aryans" >>>>> who happened to be in their way. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Many of the Nazi's ideas were based on notions that were common in >>>> the us as well, such as casterating mental defectives, regarding >>>> `lesser races' as fair for experimentation. >>> >>> Yeah, they got some of their ideas from the US Eugenics socities. >>> >> >>Including Planned Parenthood, although today they try to pretend it didn't >>happen. > > You've been listening to Rush & ilk again, I see. > > There is no comparing PP and Eugenics, either on goals or methods. Probably The Pill has changed societys more over the last 60 years than anything else, but is unacknowledged -- greymaus.ireland.ie . . ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-22 17:37 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31d4cf0bb024a33298a2ab@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #165756 |
In article <slrnnmkhft.1np.mausg@Smaus.org>, mausg@mail.com says... > > On 2016-06-21, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 06:44:24 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc > ><jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: > > > >>On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 4:15:32 AM UTC-6, ma...@mail.com wrote: > >> > >>countries fully democratic and otherwise in harmony, defense budgets would be > >>minimal. > >> > >>John Savard > > > > As I've said in here before, the main differences between communism > > and nazism is 1) the color of their uniforms, 2) the reasons they use > > to murder millions of people. Otherwise nutters. > > > > The Nazis were, and are (read what AfD is about), racists. They would never > have won WWII because of that. They would never have won because they didn't have the resources to win. If they had had the resources and location of the Soviet Union it could have been a different story.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 25 of 27 — ← Prev page 1 … 23 24 [25] 26 27 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web