Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #521822 > unrolled thread
| Started by | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-18 10:50 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-09-23 05:47 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 138 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-18 10:50 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 14:53 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 15:33 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-18 20:03 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 18:03 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> - 2015-09-18 17:13 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:06 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 23:04 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-19 04:48 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:08 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-19 13:22 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-19 13:43 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-19 13:54 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 15:51 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-21 20:54 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-21 14:03 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-21 14:45 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-22 05:43 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-21 22:16 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-22 01:29 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 09:35 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-19 18:12 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 13:22 -0500
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-19 18:42 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 13:58 -0500
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-19 20:13 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 12:54 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 16:30 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 13:22 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-19 22:23 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 17:10 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 01:15 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-19 22:33 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 03:09 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 00:45 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 20:17 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 05:35 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-20 00:20 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 01:20 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-20 15:28 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 17:22 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-20 18:18 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-20 11:31 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 18:50 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-20 19:06 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-20 20:49 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 18:46 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-20 20:53 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 21:31 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 19:08 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-20 23:17 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-20 23:36 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-20 23:34 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-21 00:00 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-21 00:06 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-21 02:16 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-21 02:42 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-21 04:57 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-21 05:23 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-09-21 06:13 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-21 13:18 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-21 14:21 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 18:24 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2015-09-19 00:46 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 04:09 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2015-09-19 11:57 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 16:23 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 17:43 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Rhino <no_offline_contact_please@example.com> - 2015-09-19 18:00 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 18:59 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Rhino <no_offline_contact_please@example.com> - 2015-09-20 15:11 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-20 15:24 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:44 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-20 18:40 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 19:18 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 15:54 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Rhino <no_offline_contact_please@example.com> - 2015-09-20 17:17 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 19:05 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2015-09-20 20:30 -0600
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-09-20 16:03 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Rhino <no_offline_contact_please@example.com> - 2015-09-20 17:22 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:51 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-29 03:20 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 00:29 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-19 23:17 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> - 2015-09-19 23:19 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-19 23:57 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-20 00:01 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-20 00:06 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-20 08:24 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 08:29 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 12:04 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-09-20 16:00 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 07:42 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> - 2015-09-20 15:57 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 18:48 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-20 23:27 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-20 23:33 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 17:25 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-09-20 10:52 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 08:30 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 09:33 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2015-09-19 11:57 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 13:07 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-19 16:13 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 16:21 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 13:33 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 20:17 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 17:28 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 00:54 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> - 2015-09-19 22:32 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Mike M <mike@xenocyte.com> - 2015-09-20 06:01 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-20 11:47 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics BTR1701 <address_is@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-20 15:51 -0500
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> - 2015-09-20 16:55 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> - 2015-09-20 23:56 +0000
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-20 23:35 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 03:31 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-19 23:09 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-19 20:34 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-21 06:26 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-23 07:15 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2015-09-21 01:22 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Rhino <no_offline_contact_please@example.com> - 2015-09-19 17:51 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-18 12:59 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-09-18 13:10 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> - 2015-09-18 17:14 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-18 22:41 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-18 23:03 -0700
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-21 05:54 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-21 01:06 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-21 07:42 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-21 02:02 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-21 20:32 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-21 16:49 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-22 06:02 +0200
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Persecute Global Warming Skeptics Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> - 2015-09-22 19:48 -0400
Re: Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-23 05:47 +0200
Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Next page →
| From | Rhino <no_offline_contact_please@example.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 17:22 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtn7ui$7a9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #522271 |
On 2015-09-20 4:03 PM, Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote: > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:11:50 -0400, Rhino > <no_offline_contact_please@example.com> wrote: > >> As I understand, the US has about 2 million people in prison. >> >> There's one other crucial difference between the Soviet experience and >> the American one: the vast majority of people in the Gulags were not >> guilty of anything that any reasonable person would call a crime. The >> vast majority of people in the US prison system are actually guilty of >> serious crimes like murder, rape, etc. > > No, the majority are guilty of drug-related offenses. Rape and murder > are definitely not even close to a majority. > Drug-related offenses like importing kilos of hard drugs. Please don't pretend these are college kids who got sentenced to lengthy terms for smoking a joint at a party. I get that some people want to legalize ALL drug use, which would eliminate drug crime too, but I submit that such a position would not get very much public support. Realistically, marijuana possession for small quantities might plausibly come to pass in the not-too-distant future but I think drug trafficking for heroin, cocaine, etc. is likely to stay a crime for the forseeable future. -- Rhino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 18:51 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3069028c607eebc5989b60@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #522298 |
In article <mtn7ui$7a9$1@dont-email.me>, no_offline_contact_please@example.com says... > > On 2015-09-20 4:03 PM, Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote: > > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:11:50 -0400, Rhino > > <no_offline_contact_please@example.com> wrote: > > > >> As I understand, the US has about 2 million people in prison. > >> > >> There's one other crucial difference between the Soviet experience and > >> the American one: the vast majority of people in the Gulags were not > >> guilty of anything that any reasonable person would call a crime. The > >> vast majority of people in the US prison system are actually guilty of > >> serious crimes like murder, rape, etc. > > > > No, the majority are guilty of drug-related offenses. Rape and murder > > are definitely not even close to a majority. > > > Drug-related offenses like importing kilos of hard drugs. Please don't > pretend these are college kids who got sentenced to lengthy terms for > smoking a joint at a party. > > I get that some people want to legalize ALL drug use, which would > eliminate drug crime too, but I submit that such a position would not > get very much public support. Realistically, marijuana possession for > small quantities might plausibly come to pass in the not-too-distant > future but I think drug trafficking for heroin, cocaine, etc. is likely > to stay a crime for the forseeable future. Do look at the numbers. As for the rest, the "war on drugs" isn't working even a tiny bit better than the "war on alcohol" in the late '20s and early '30s. The only difference is that in the '30s they had the good sense to recognize that it was making things worse instead of better and repeal the laws that were causing the problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-29 03:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <d6u7bcFubslU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #522345 |
Am 21.09.2015 00:51, schrieb J. Clarke: >>>> There's one other crucial difference between the Soviet experience and >>>> the American one: the vast majority of people in the Gulags were not >>>> guilty of anything that any reasonable person would call a crime. The >>>> vast majority of people in the US prison system are actually guilty of >>>> serious crimes like murder, rape, etc. >>> >>> No, the majority are guilty of drug-related offenses. Rape and murder >>> are definitely not even close to a majority. >>> >> Drug-related offenses like importing kilos of hard drugs. Please don't >> pretend these are college kids who got sentenced to lengthy terms for >> smoking a joint at a party. >> >> I get that some people want to legalize ALL drug use, which would >> eliminate drug crime too, but I submit that such a position would not >> get very much public support. Realistically, marijuana possession for >> small quantities might plausibly come to pass in the not-too-distant >> future but I think drug trafficking for heroin, cocaine, etc. is likely >> to stay a crime for the forseeable future. > > Do look at the numbers. > > As for the rest, the "war on drugs" isn't working even a tiny bit better > than the "war on alcohol" in the late '20s and early '30s. The only > difference is that in the '30s they had the good sense to recognize that > it was making things worse instead of better and repeal the laws that > were causing the problem. > To reduce the drug related problems you need to 'take the money out'. Drugs are a huge business and they will remain a problem, as long as there is a related business. So people should think about means, to make drug-trade less profitable. One possibility is to make addiction itself legal (like consumption). It's not really allowed, but not prosecuted and instead treated, if possible. This would reduce the number of related 'criminals' by a large part and leave only the dealers in focus. But it's actually possible, to push down the price further, if replacement drugs are given to addicts for free. Or even the 'real thing' could be sold for moderate prices and under safe condition (to proven addicts only, of course). This would also reduce the health risks of the general public, since less diseases among addicts are also less threats by such diseases. This would then reduce (greatly) the risk to become victim of a crime and that would be a great advantage of such policy. And last but not least: prisons are VERY expensive and keeping people looked away in large numbers will eventually reduce the budget for other purposes (like -say- education, pavements or powerlines). TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <nobody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 00:29 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <OCqLx.35112$zC5.7649@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #522107 |
On 09/19/2015 06:00 PM, Rhino wrote:
> On 2015-09-19 5:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> In article <qvjLx.16451$sa4.10466@fx09.iad>, none@gmail.com says...
>>>
>>> On 09/19/2015 02:57 PM, Charles H. Sampson wrote:
>>>> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>,
>>>>> csampson@inetworld.net says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as
>>>>>>>> well as
>>>>>>>> political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana
>>>>>>>> Republics, of
>>>>>>>> which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored
>>>>>>>> method is dropping deniers out Helicopters
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as
>>>>>>> actually DOING it, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus
>>>>>> signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute
>>>>>> anybody.
>>>>>> It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to
>>>>>> conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to
>>>>>> see if
>>>>>> they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the
>>>>>> detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the
>>>>>> investigation concludes that that's what they're doing,
>>>>>> prosecution can
>>>>>> follow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate?
>>>>
>>>> They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful
>>>> evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute?
>>>>
>>>>> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're
>>>>> going to find a witch whether there is one or not.
>>>>
>>>> A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against
>>>> organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be
>>>> used in
>>>> other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time.
>>>>
>>>> Charlie
>>>
>>> Cynical? What I call cynical is your assessment that using a law passed
>>> to fight organized crime to attack corporations selling a legal
>>> federally regulated product like tobacco or guns to further some leftist
>>> Lib agenda isn't a witch-hunt and abuse of power. The fact that you
>>> commies have managed to "get away" with your "we know what is best for
>>> you" agenda in no way changes how dishonest it is.
>>
>> You know that calling them "commies" is an insult to commies don't you?
>> Talk to some people who grew up under Communism (half the people I work
>> with did) and you'll find that oppressive as it was, it didn't have the
>> kind of individualized micromanagment that the US seems to be bent on
>> implementing (they micromanaged themselves to destruction, but it was
>> micromanagement on a grand scale, not the "mow your lawn or we'll throw
>> you in jail" kind that is becoming popular in the US). We think we're
>> "better" than they were because we don't shoot dissidents (we apparently
>> reserve that for unarmed teenagers). But we have a higher percentage of
>> our population locked up than the Soviets or the Chinese ever managed
>> and nobody seems to see anything wrong with that except the people who
>> are locked up.
>>
> Have you read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago? He states clearly that
> only 1 in 7 of the people who were sent to the gulag survived their
> sentences.
> In another book, Under the Rubble, written with a fellow political
> prisoner named Igor Shafarevich, he writes that he is absolutely CERTAIN
> 20 million people were sent to the Gulag and thinks it may well have
> been as many as 120 million people. If you then apply the 6-in-7 death
> rate, then AT LEAST 17 million people died there and as many as 102
> million people.
>
> Do you *seriously* mean to tell me that the US has more than 20 million
> people locked up, let alone 120 million? If so, you are in serious need
> of some reading time to bone up on your facts.
All the Guinness World Records for Genocide are Held by communist
states. People like to use Hitler as an example, but he was a rank
amateur when it came to murdering your own people. Commies showed how
it's done!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\_:/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
\/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 23:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #522149 |
benj wrote: > > On 09/19/2015 06:00 PM, Rhino wrote: > > On 2015-09-19 5:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > >> In article <qvjLx.16451$sa4.10466@fx09.iad>, none@gmail.com says... > >>> > >>> On 09/19/2015 02:57 PM, Charles H. Sampson wrote: > >>>> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>, > >>>>> csampson@inetworld.net says... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as > >>>>>>>> well as > >>>>>>>> political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana > >>>>>>>> Republics, of > >>>>>>>> which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored > >>>>>>>> method is dropping deniers out Helicopters > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as > >>>>>>> actually DOING it, right? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus > >>>>>> signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute > >>>>>> anybody. > >>>>>> It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to > >>>>>> conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to > >>>>>> see if > >>>>>> they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the > >>>>>> detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the > >>>>>> investigation concludes that that's what they're doing, > >>>>>> prosecution can > >>>>>> follow. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ... > >>>>> > >>>>> If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate? > >>>> > >>>> They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful > >>>> evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute? > >>>> > >>>>> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're > >>>>> going to find a witch whether there is one or not. > >>>> > >>>> A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against > >>>> organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be > >>>> used in > >>>> other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time. > >>>> > >>>> Charlie > >>> > >>> Cynical? What I call cynical is your assessment that using a law passed > >>> to fight organized crime to attack corporations selling a legal > >>> federally regulated product like tobacco or guns to further some leftist > >>> Lib agenda isn't a witch-hunt and abuse of power. The fact that you > >>> commies have managed to "get away" with your "we know what is best for > >>> you" agenda in no way changes how dishonest it is. > >> > >> You know that calling them "commies" is an insult to commies don't you? > >> Talk to some people who grew up under Communism (half the people I work > >> with did) and you'll find that oppressive as it was, it didn't have the > >> kind of individualized micromanagment that the US seems to be bent on > >> implementing (they micromanaged themselves to destruction, but it was > >> micromanagement on a grand scale, not the "mow your lawn or we'll throw > >> you in jail" kind that is becoming popular in the US). We think we're > >> "better" than they were because we don't shoot dissidents (we apparently > >> reserve that for unarmed teenagers). But we have a higher percentage of > >> our population locked up than the Soviets or the Chinese ever managed > >> and nobody seems to see anything wrong with that except the people who > >> are locked up. > >> > > Have you read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago? He states clearly that > > only 1 in 7 of the people who were sent to the gulag survived their > > sentences. > > In another book, Under the Rubble, written with a fellow political > > prisoner named Igor Shafarevich, he writes that he is absolutely CERTAIN > > 20 million people were sent to the Gulag and thinks it may well have > > been as many as 120 million people. If you then apply the 6-in-7 death > > rate, then AT LEAST 17 million people died there and as many as 102 > > million people. > > > > Do you *seriously* mean to tell me that the US has more than 20 million > > people locked up, let alone 120 million? If so, you are in serious need > > of some reading time to bone up on your facts. > > All the Guinness World Records for Genocide are Held by communist > states. People like to use Hitler as an example, but he was a rank > amateur when it came to murdering your own people. Commies showed how > it's done! But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred million people called....indians.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 23:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <anim8rfsk-A00493.23195619092015@news.easynews.com> |
| In reply to | #522160 |
In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > benj wrote: > > > > On 09/19/2015 06:00 PM, Rhino wrote: > > > On 2015-09-19 5:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > > >> In article <qvjLx.16451$sa4.10466@fx09.iad>, none@gmail.com says... > > >>> > > >>> On 09/19/2015 02:57 PM, Charles H. Sampson wrote: > > >>>> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>, > > >>>>> csampson@inetworld.net says... > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as > > >>>>>>>> well as > > >>>>>>>> political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana > > >>>>>>>> Republics, of > > >>>>>>>> which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored > > >>>>>>>> method is dropping deniers out Helicopters > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as > > >>>>>>> actually DOING it, right? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus > > >>>>>> signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute > > >>>>>> anybody. > > >>>>>> It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to > > >>>>>> conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to > > >>>>>> see if > > >>>>>> they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the > > >>>>>> detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the > > >>>>>> investigation concludes that that's what they're doing, > > >>>>>> prosecution can > > >>>>>> follow. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> ... > > >>>>> > > >>>>> If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate? > > >>>> > > >>>> They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful > > >>>> evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute? > > >>>> > > >>>>> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're > > >>>>> going to find a witch whether there is one or not. > > >>>> > > >>>> A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against > > >>>> organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be > > >>>> used in > > >>>> other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time. > > >>>> > > >>>> Charlie > > >>> > > >>> Cynical? What I call cynical is your assessment that using a law passed > > >>> to fight organized crime to attack corporations selling a legal > > >>> federally regulated product like tobacco or guns to further some leftist > > >>> Lib agenda isn't a witch-hunt and abuse of power. The fact that you > > >>> commies have managed to "get away" with your "we know what is best for > > >>> you" agenda in no way changes how dishonest it is. > > >> > > >> You know that calling them "commies" is an insult to commies don't you? > > >> Talk to some people who grew up under Communism (half the people I work > > >> with did) and you'll find that oppressive as it was, it didn't have the > > >> kind of individualized micromanagment that the US seems to be bent on > > >> implementing (they micromanaged themselves to destruction, but it was > > >> micromanagement on a grand scale, not the "mow your lawn or we'll throw > > >> you in jail" kind that is becoming popular in the US). We think we're > > >> "better" than they were because we don't shoot dissidents (we apparently > > >> reserve that for unarmed teenagers). But we have a higher percentage of > > >> our population locked up than the Soviets or the Chinese ever managed > > >> and nobody seems to see anything wrong with that except the people who > > >> are locked up. > > >> > > > Have you read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago? He states clearly that > > > only 1 in 7 of the people who were sent to the gulag survived their > > > sentences. > > > In another book, Under the Rubble, written with a fellow political > > > prisoner named Igor Shafarevich, he writes that he is absolutely CERTAIN > > > 20 million people were sent to the Gulag and thinks it may well have > > > been as many as 120 million people. If you then apply the 6-in-7 death > > > rate, then AT LEAST 17 million people died there and as many as 102 > > > million people. > > > > > > Do you *seriously* mean to tell me that the US has more than 20 million > > > people locked up, let alone 120 million? If so, you are in serious need > > > of some reading time to bone up on your facts. > > > > All the Guinness World Records for Genocide are Held by communist > > states. People like to use Hitler as an example, but he was a rank > > amateur when it came to murdering your own people. Commies showed how > > it's done! > > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred > million people called....indians. Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a point. -- SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUZZEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEQUUUUUUUUUUUUuuuuuuuuuu......
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 23:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55FE58D5.6AAB@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #522162 |
anim8rfsk wrote: > > In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>, > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > benj wrote: > > > > > > On 09/19/2015 06:00 PM, Rhino wrote: > > > > On 2015-09-19 5:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > > > >> In article <qvjLx.16451$sa4.10466@fx09.iad>, none@gmail.com says... > > > >>> > > > >>> On 09/19/2015 02:57 PM, Charles H. Sampson wrote: > > > >>>> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>, > > > >>>>> csampson@inetworld.net says... > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said: > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as > > > >>>>>>>> well as > > > >>>>>>>> political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana > > > >>>>>>>> Republics, of > > > >>>>>>>> which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored > > > >>>>>>>> method is dropping deniers out Helicopters > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as > > > >>>>>>> actually DOING it, right? > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus > > > >>>>>> signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute > > > >>>>>> anybody. > > > >>>>>> It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to > > > >>>>>> conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to > > > >>>>>> see if > > > >>>>>> they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the > > > >>>>>> detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the > > > >>>>>> investigation concludes that that's what they're doing, > > > >>>>>> prosecution can > > > >>>>>> follow. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> ... > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate? > > > >>>> > > > >>>> They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful > > > >>>> evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute? > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're > > > >>>>> going to find a witch whether there is one or not. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against > > > >>>> organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be > > > >>>> used in > > > >>>> other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Charlie > > > >>> > > > >>> Cynical? What I call cynical is your assessment that using a law passed > > > >>> to fight organized crime to attack corporations selling a legal > > > >>> federally regulated product like tobacco or guns to further some leftist > > > >>> Lib agenda isn't a witch-hunt and abuse of power. The fact that you > > > >>> commies have managed to "get away" with your "we know what is best for > > > >>> you" agenda in no way changes how dishonest it is. > > > >> > > > >> You know that calling them "commies" is an insult to commies don't you? > > > >> Talk to some people who grew up under Communism (half the people I work > > > >> with did) and you'll find that oppressive as it was, it didn't have the > > > >> kind of individualized micromanagment that the US seems to be bent on > > > >> implementing (they micromanaged themselves to destruction, but it was > > > >> micromanagement on a grand scale, not the "mow your lawn or we'll throw > > > >> you in jail" kind that is becoming popular in the US). We think we're > > > >> "better" than they were because we don't shoot dissidents (we apparently > > > >> reserve that for unarmed teenagers). But we have a higher percentage of > > > >> our population locked up than the Soviets or the Chinese ever managed > > > >> and nobody seems to see anything wrong with that except the people who > > > >> are locked up. > > > >> > > > > Have you read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago? He states clearly that > > > > only 1 in 7 of the people who were sent to the gulag survived their > > > > sentences. > > > > In another book, Under the Rubble, written with a fellow political > > > > prisoner named Igor Shafarevich, he writes that he is absolutely CERTAIN > > > > 20 million people were sent to the Gulag and thinks it may well have > > > > been as many as 120 million people. If you then apply the 6-in-7 death > > > > rate, then AT LEAST 17 million people died there and as many as 102 > > > > million people. > > > > > > > > Do you *seriously* mean to tell me that the US has more than 20 million > > > > people locked up, let alone 120 million? If so, you are in serious need > > > > of some reading time to bone up on your facts. > > > > > > All the Guinness World Records for Genocide are Held by communist > > > states. People like to use Hitler as an example, but he was a rank > > > amateur when it came to murdering your own people. Commies showed how > > > it's done! > > > > > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred > > million people called....indians. > > Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a > point. " During that time the native population of the Western Hemisphere declined by as many as 100 million people. Indeed, as historian David E. Stannard argues in this stunning new book, the European and white American destruction of the native peoples of the Americas was the most massive act of genocide in the history of the world." http://www.amazon.com/American-Holocaust-The-Conquest-World/dp/0195085574 https://onkwehonwerising.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/american-holocaust.pdf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 00:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55FE59BB.2032@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #522162 |
anim8rfsk wrote:
>
> In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>,
> The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > benj wrote:
> > >
> > > On 09/19/2015 06:00 PM, Rhino wrote:
> > > > On 2015-09-19 5:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > > >> In article <qvjLx.16451$sa4.10466@fx09.iad>, none@gmail.com says...
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 09/19/2015 02:57 PM, Charles H. Sampson wrote:
> > > >>>> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>,
> > > >>>>> csampson@inetworld.net says...
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as
> > > >>>>>>>> well as
> > > >>>>>>>> political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana
> > > >>>>>>>> Republics, of
> > > >>>>>>>> which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored
> > > >>>>>>>> method is dropping deniers out Helicopters
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as
> > > >>>>>>> actually DOING it, right?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus
> > > >>>>>> signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute
> > > >>>>>> anybody.
> > > >>>>>> It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to
> > > >>>>>> conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to
> > > >>>>>> see if
> > > >>>>>> they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the
> > > >>>>>> detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the
> > > >>>>>> investigation concludes that that's what they're doing,
> > > >>>>>> prosecution can
> > > >>>>>> follow.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> ...
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful
> > > >>>> evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're
> > > >>>>> going to find a witch whether there is one or not.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against
> > > >>>> organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be
> > > >>>> used in
> > > >>>> other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Charlie
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Cynical? What I call cynical is your assessment that using a law passed
> > > >>> to fight organized crime to attack corporations selling a legal
> > > >>> federally regulated product like tobacco or guns to further some leftist
> > > >>> Lib agenda isn't a witch-hunt and abuse of power. The fact that you
> > > >>> commies have managed to "get away" with your "we know what is best for
> > > >>> you" agenda in no way changes how dishonest it is.
> > > >>
> > > >> You know that calling them "commies" is an insult to commies don't you?
> > > >> Talk to some people who grew up under Communism (half the people I work
> > > >> with did) and you'll find that oppressive as it was, it didn't have the
> > > >> kind of individualized micromanagment that the US seems to be bent on
> > > >> implementing (they micromanaged themselves to destruction, but it was
> > > >> micromanagement on a grand scale, not the "mow your lawn or we'll throw
> > > >> you in jail" kind that is becoming popular in the US). We think we're
> > > >> "better" than they were because we don't shoot dissidents (we apparently
> > > >> reserve that for unarmed teenagers). But we have a higher percentage of
> > > >> our population locked up than the Soviets or the Chinese ever managed
> > > >> and nobody seems to see anything wrong with that except the people who
> > > >> are locked up.
> > > >>
> > > > Have you read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago? He states clearly that
> > > > only 1 in 7 of the people who were sent to the gulag survived their
> > > > sentences.
> > > > In another book, Under the Rubble, written with a fellow political
> > > > prisoner named Igor Shafarevich, he writes that he is absolutely CERTAIN
> > > > 20 million people were sent to the Gulag and thinks it may well have
> > > > been as many as 120 million people. If you then apply the 6-in-7 death
> > > > rate, then AT LEAST 17 million people died there and as many as 102
> > > > million people.
> > > >
> > > > Do you *seriously* mean to tell me that the US has more than 20 million
> > > > people locked up, let alone 120 million? If so, you are in serious need
> > > > of some reading time to bone up on your facts.
> > >
> > > All the Guinness World Records for Genocide are Held by communist
> > > states. People like to use Hitler as an example, but he was a rank
> > > amateur when it came to murdering your own people. Commies showed how
> > > it's done!
> >
> >
> > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred
> > million people called....indians.
>
> Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a
> point.
>
The North American Indians:
Estimates on the American Indian population before European contact
range from between 2 and 18 million. By 1890, only 250,000 native Americans remained.
(1) The total death toll has been estimated at around 100 million American Indians from the time of Columbus'
arrival to the end of the Indian Wars 400 years later.
- “Over 100 million killed”. (D. Stannard. American Holocaust. 1992. Oxford Press)
http://www.ancient-wisdom.com/americanindians.htm
(i forgot to mention i'm an expert on the subject of the American Holocaust)
(so don't even think about challenging me cause you're not going to like the...Truth)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 00:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55FE5AF4.4107@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #522165 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > anim8rfsk wrote: > > > > In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>, > > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > benj wrote: > > > > > > > > On 09/19/2015 06:00 PM, Rhino wrote: > > > > > On 2015-09-19 5:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > > > > >> In article <qvjLx.16451$sa4.10466@fx09.iad>, none@gmail.com says... > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On 09/19/2015 02:57 PM, Charles H. Sampson wrote: > > > > >>>> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>, > > > > >>>>> csampson@inetworld.net says... > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said: > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as > > > > >>>>>>>> well as > > > > >>>>>>>> political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana > > > > >>>>>>>> Republics, of > > > > >>>>>>>> which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored > > > > >>>>>>>> method is dropping deniers out Helicopters > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as > > > > >>>>>>> actually DOING it, right? > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus > > > > >>>>>> signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute > > > > >>>>>> anybody. > > > > >>>>>> It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to > > > > >>>>>> conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to > > > > >>>>>> see if > > > > >>>>>> they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the > > > > >>>>>> detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the > > > > >>>>>> investigation concludes that that's what they're doing, > > > > >>>>>> prosecution can > > > > >>>>>> follow. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> ... > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful > > > > >>>> evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're > > > > >>>>> going to find a witch whether there is one or not. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against > > > > >>>> organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be > > > > >>>> used in > > > > >>>> other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Charlie > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Cynical? What I call cynical is your assessment that using a law passed > > > > >>> to fight organized crime to attack corporations selling a legal > > > > >>> federally regulated product like tobacco or guns to further some leftist > > > > >>> Lib agenda isn't a witch-hunt and abuse of power. The fact that you > > > > >>> commies have managed to "get away" with your "we know what is best for > > > > >>> you" agenda in no way changes how dishonest it is. > > > > >> > > > > >> You know that calling them "commies" is an insult to commies don't you? > > > > >> Talk to some people who grew up under Communism (half the people I work > > > > >> with did) and you'll find that oppressive as it was, it didn't have the > > > > >> kind of individualized micromanagment that the US seems to be bent on > > > > >> implementing (they micromanaged themselves to destruction, but it was > > > > >> micromanagement on a grand scale, not the "mow your lawn or we'll throw > > > > >> you in jail" kind that is becoming popular in the US). We think we're > > > > >> "better" than they were because we don't shoot dissidents (we apparently > > > > >> reserve that for unarmed teenagers). But we have a higher percentage of > > > > >> our population locked up than the Soviets or the Chinese ever managed > > > > >> and nobody seems to see anything wrong with that except the people who > > > > >> are locked up. > > > > >> > > > > > Have you read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago? He states clearly that > > > > > only 1 in 7 of the people who were sent to the gulag survived their > > > > > sentences. > > > > > In another book, Under the Rubble, written with a fellow political > > > > > prisoner named Igor Shafarevich, he writes that he is absolutely CERTAIN > > > > > 20 million people were sent to the Gulag and thinks it may well have > > > > > been as many as 120 million people. If you then apply the 6-in-7 death > > > > > rate, then AT LEAST 17 million people died there and as many as 102 > > > > > million people. > > > > > > > > > > Do you *seriously* mean to tell me that the US has more than 20 million > > > > > people locked up, let alone 120 million? If so, you are in serious need > > > > > of some reading time to bone up on your facts. > > > > > > > > All the Guinness World Records for Genocide are Held by communist > > > > states. People like to use Hitler as an example, but he was a rank > > > > amateur when it came to murdering your own people. Commies showed how > > > > it's done! > > > > > > > > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred > > > million people called....indians. > > > > Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a > > point. > > > > The North American Indians: > > Estimates on the American Indian population before European contact > range from between 2 and 18 million. By 1890, only 250,000 native Americans remained. > (1) The total death toll has been estimated at around 100 million American Indians from the time of Columbus' > arrival to the end of the Indian Wars 400 years later. > > - “Over 100 million killed”. (D. Stannard. American Holocaust. 1992. Oxford Press) > > http://www.ancient-wisdom.com/americanindians.htm > > (i forgot to mention i'm an expert on the subject of the American Holocaust) > > (so don't even think about challenging me cause you're not going to like the...Truth) of course they killed a lot of indians on TV... I don't know how many indians John Wayne killed... but there was a time when all you saw on TV was cowboys killing indians. i wonder why they stopped?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 08:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <atropos-7CDE65.08244920092015@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #522165 |
In article <55FE59BB.2032@ix.netcom.com>, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > anim8rfsk wrote: > > > > In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>, > > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred > > > million people called....indians. > > > > Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a > > point. > > > > The North American Indians: > > Estimates on the American Indian population before European contact > range from between 2 and 18 million. So you've gone from "Americans" to "Europeans" in the space of one post. Nice backpedal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 08:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <anim8rfsk-A21383.08293920092015@news.easynews.com> |
| In reply to | #522216 |
In article <atropos-7CDE65.08244920092015@news.giganews.com>, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote: > In article <55FE59BB.2032@ix.netcom.com>, > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > anim8rfsk wrote: > > > > > > In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>, > > > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred > > > > million people called....indians. > > > > > > Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a > > > point. > > > > > > > The North American Indians: > > > > Estimates on the American Indian population before European contact > > range from between 2 and 18 million. > > So you've gone from "Americans" to "Europeans" in the space of one post. > Nice backpedal. And those Europeans killed 100 million of the 2 million Indians. -- SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUZZEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEQUUUUUUUUUUUUuuuuuuuuuu......
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 12:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3068a320b05e92d7989b5b@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #522218 |
In article <anim8rfsk-A21383.08293920092015@news.easynews.com>, anim8rfsk@cox.net says... > > In article <atropos-7CDE65.08244920092015@news.giganews.com>, > BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote: > > > In article <55FE59BB.2032@ix.netcom.com>, > > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > anim8rfsk wrote: > > > > > > > > In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>, > > > > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred > > > > > million people called....indians. > > > > > > > > Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a > > > > point. > > > > > > > > > > The North American Indians: > > > > > > Estimates on the American Indian population before European contact > > > range from between 2 and 18 million. > > > > So you've gone from "Americans" to "Europeans" in the space of one post. > > Nice backpedal. > > And those Europeans killed 100 million of the 2 million Indians. Just a note but that 2-18 is for North America. There were a lot of them in South America as well.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 16:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ru3uva1925o1dfce01ifvcqofbuv8ljlvn@reader80.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #522221 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 12:04:40 -0400, "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >In article <anim8rfsk-A21383.08293920092015@news.easynews.com>, >anim8rfsk@cox.net says... >> >> In article <atropos-7CDE65.08244920092015@news.giganews.com>, >> BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote: >> >> > In article <55FE59BB.2032@ix.netcom.com>, >> > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> > >> > > anim8rfsk wrote: >> > > > >> > > > In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>, >> > > > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> > >> > > > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred >> > > > > million people called....indians. >> > > > >> > > > Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a >> > > > point. >> > > > >> > > >> > > The North American Indians: >> > > >> > > Estimates on the American Indian population before European contact >> > > range from between 2 and 18 million. >> > >> > So you've gone from "Americans" to "Europeans" in the space of one post. >> > Nice backpedal. >> >> And those Europeans killed 100 million of the 2 million Indians. > >Just a note but that 2-18 is for North America. There were a lot of >them in South America as well. Two million is absurdly low; even 18 seems unlikely. I'm pretty sure I'd seen an estimate of 30 million. I mean, the Aztec empire, the Hohokam empire, the Mississipian culture, the East Coast farming societies -- there were a lot of people here. But it wasn't 100 million. -- My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 07:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.306865aad5ea8cc3989b54@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #522162 |
In article <anim8rfsk-A00493.23195619092015@news.easynews.com>, anim8rfsk@cox.net says... > > In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>, > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > benj wrote: > > > > > > On 09/19/2015 06:00 PM, Rhino wrote: > > > > On 2015-09-19 5:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > > > >> In article <qvjLx.16451$sa4.10466@fx09.iad>, none@gmail.com says... > > > >>> > > > >>> On 09/19/2015 02:57 PM, Charles H. Sampson wrote: > > > >>>> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>, > > > >>>>> csampson@inetworld.net says... > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said: > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as > > > >>>>>>>> well as > > > >>>>>>>> political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana > > > >>>>>>>> Republics, of > > > >>>>>>>> which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored > > > >>>>>>>> method is dropping deniers out Helicopters > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as > > > >>>>>>> actually DOING it, right? > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus > > > >>>>>> signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute > > > >>>>>> anybody. > > > >>>>>> It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to > > > >>>>>> conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to > > > >>>>>> see if > > > >>>>>> they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the > > > >>>>>> detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the > > > >>>>>> investigation concludes that that's what they're doing, > > > >>>>>> prosecution can > > > >>>>>> follow. > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> ... > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate? > > > >>>> > > > >>>> They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful > > > >>>> evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute? > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're > > > >>>>> going to find a witch whether there is one or not. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against > > > >>>> organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be > > > >>>> used in > > > >>>> other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Charlie > > > >>> > > > >>> Cynical? What I call cynical is your assessment that using a law passed > > > >>> to fight organized crime to attack corporations selling a legal > > > >>> federally regulated product like tobacco or guns to further some leftist > > > >>> Lib agenda isn't a witch-hunt and abuse of power. The fact that you > > > >>> commies have managed to "get away" with your "we know what is best for > > > >>> you" agenda in no way changes how dishonest it is. > > > >> > > > >> You know that calling them "commies" is an insult to commies don't you? > > > >> Talk to some people who grew up under Communism (half the people I work > > > >> with did) and you'll find that oppressive as it was, it didn't have the > > > >> kind of individualized micromanagment that the US seems to be bent on > > > >> implementing (they micromanaged themselves to destruction, but it was > > > >> micromanagement on a grand scale, not the "mow your lawn or we'll throw > > > >> you in jail" kind that is becoming popular in the US). We think we're > > > >> "better" than they were because we don't shoot dissidents (we apparently > > > >> reserve that for unarmed teenagers). But we have a higher percentage of > > > >> our population locked up than the Soviets or the Chinese ever managed > > > >> and nobody seems to see anything wrong with that except the people who > > > >> are locked up. > > > >> > > > > Have you read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago? He states clearly that > > > > only 1 in 7 of the people who were sent to the gulag survived their > > > > sentences. > > > > In another book, Under the Rubble, written with a fellow political > > > > prisoner named Igor Shafarevich, he writes that he is absolutely CERTAIN > > > > 20 million people were sent to the Gulag and thinks it may well have > > > > been as many as 120 million people. If you then apply the 6-in-7 death > > > > rate, then AT LEAST 17 million people died there and as many as 102 > > > > million people. > > > > > > > > Do you *seriously* mean to tell me that the US has more than 20 million > > > > people locked up, let alone 120 million? If so, you are in serious need > > > > of some reading time to bone up on your facts. > > > > > > All the Guinness World Records for Genocide are Held by communist > > > states. People like to use Hitler as an example, but he was a rank > > > amateur when it came to murdering your own people. Commies showed how > > > it's done! > > > > > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred > > million people called....indians. > > Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a > point. He never has a point. However just for the record, it wasn't "Americans" that killed huge number of "Indians", it was the Spanish, who introducted smallpox and other diseases, and in fairness to the Spanish, they had no clue that that was going to happen--I don't think they even understood the notion of "infectious disease" in any meaningful way, let alone notions like "healthy carrier" and "no immunity". Not saying they wouldn't have done it if they had known, but they didn't so the point is moot. By the time "Americans" came along, those "Indians" were long since dead. Quit a lot of nasty stuff was done to the survivors, but that's another story.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence Watt-Evans <lwe@sff.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 15:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <tk3uva5j8kn4l57mvr2me1fe9eghtc2ftv@reader80.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #522198 |
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 07:42:22 -0400, "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >He never has a point. However just for the record, it wasn't >"Americans" that killed huge number of "Indians", it was the Spanish, >who introducted smallpox and other diseases, and in fairness to the >Spanish, they had no clue that that was going to happen--I don't think >they even understood the notion of "infectious disease" in any >meaningful way, let alone notions like "healthy carrier" and "no >immunity". Not saying they wouldn't have done it if they had known, but >they didn't so the point is moot. By the time "Americans" came along, >those "Indians" were long since dead. Quit a lot of nasty stuff was >done to the survivors, but that's another story. Not just the Spanish; the English and French were also responsible, though they didn't know it. When the Mayflower arrived at Plymouth the local population had been devastated by disease brought by an English trading expedition the year before. Whole villages were depopulated, and the only reason the Pilgrims survived was that they took over one of those deserted villages. -- My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 18:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.306901a833dbad2a989b5f@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #522268 |
In article <tk3uva5j8kn4l57mvr2me1fe9eghtc2ftv@reader80.eternal- september.org>, lwe@sff.net says... > > On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 07:42:22 -0400, "J. Clarke" > <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >He never has a point. However just for the record, it wasn't > >"Americans" that killed huge number of "Indians", it was the Spanish, > >who introducted smallpox and other diseases, and in fairness to the > >Spanish, they had no clue that that was going to happen--I don't think > >they even understood the notion of "infectious disease" in any > >meaningful way, let alone notions like "healthy carrier" and "no > >immunity". Not saying they wouldn't have done it if they had known, but > >they didn't so the point is moot. By the time "Americans" came along, > >those "Indians" were long since dead. Quit a lot of nasty stuff was > >done to the survivors, but that's another story. > > Not just the Spanish; the English and French were also responsible, > though they didn't know it. > > When the Mayflower arrived at Plymouth the local population had been > devastated by disease brought by an English trading expedition the > year before. Whole villages were depopulated, and the only reason the > Pilgrims survived was that they took over one of those deserted > villages. The Spanish, being the first on the scene, would have done the most damage. The others were filling in the gaps.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 23:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55FFA343.26CC@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #522198 |
J. Clarke wrote:
>
> In article <anim8rfsk-A00493.23195619092015@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rfsk@cox.net says...
> >
> > In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>,
> > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > > benj wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 09/19/2015 06:00 PM, Rhino wrote:
> > > > > On 2015-09-19 5:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > > > >> In article <qvjLx.16451$sa4.10466@fx09.iad>, none@gmail.com says...
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On 09/19/2015 02:57 PM, Charles H. Sampson wrote:
> > > > >>>> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>,
> > > > >>>>> csampson@inetworld.net says...
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said:
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as
> > > > >>>>>>>> well as
> > > > >>>>>>>> political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana
> > > > >>>>>>>> Republics, of
> > > > >>>>>>>> which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored
> > > > >>>>>>>> method is dropping deniers out Helicopters
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as
> > > > >>>>>>> actually DOING it, right?
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus
> > > > >>>>>> signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute
> > > > >>>>>> anybody.
> > > > >>>>>> It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to
> > > > >>>>>> conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to
> > > > >>>>>> see if
> > > > >>>>>> they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the
> > > > >>>>>> detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the
> > > > >>>>>> investigation concludes that that's what they're doing,
> > > > >>>>>> prosecution can
> > > > >>>>>> follow.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> ...
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful
> > > > >>>> evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're
> > > > >>>>> going to find a witch whether there is one or not.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against
> > > > >>>> organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be
> > > > >>>> used in
> > > > >>>> other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Charlie
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Cynical? What I call cynical is your assessment that using a law passed
> > > > >>> to fight organized crime to attack corporations selling a legal
> > > > >>> federally regulated product like tobacco or guns to further some leftist
> > > > >>> Lib agenda isn't a witch-hunt and abuse of power. The fact that you
> > > > >>> commies have managed to "get away" with your "we know what is best for
> > > > >>> you" agenda in no way changes how dishonest it is.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> You know that calling them "commies" is an insult to commies don't you?
> > > > >> Talk to some people who grew up under Communism (half the people I work
> > > > >> with did) and you'll find that oppressive as it was, it didn't have the
> > > > >> kind of individualized micromanagment that the US seems to be bent on
> > > > >> implementing (they micromanaged themselves to destruction, but it was
> > > > >> micromanagement on a grand scale, not the "mow your lawn or we'll throw
> > > > >> you in jail" kind that is becoming popular in the US). We think we're
> > > > >> "better" than they were because we don't shoot dissidents (we apparently
> > > > >> reserve that for unarmed teenagers). But we have a higher percentage of
> > > > >> our population locked up than the Soviets or the Chinese ever managed
> > > > >> and nobody seems to see anything wrong with that except the people who
> > > > >> are locked up.
> > > > >>
> > > > > Have you read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago? He states clearly that
> > > > > only 1 in 7 of the people who were sent to the gulag survived their
> > > > > sentences.
> > > > > In another book, Under the Rubble, written with a fellow political
> > > > > prisoner named Igor Shafarevich, he writes that he is absolutely CERTAIN
> > > > > 20 million people were sent to the Gulag and thinks it may well have
> > > > > been as many as 120 million people. If you then apply the 6-in-7 death
> > > > > rate, then AT LEAST 17 million people died there and as many as 102
> > > > > million people.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you *seriously* mean to tell me that the US has more than 20 million
> > > > > people locked up, let alone 120 million? If so, you are in serious need
> > > > > of some reading time to bone up on your facts.
> > > >
> > > > All the Guinness World Records for Genocide are Held by communist
> > > > states. People like to use Hitler as an example, but he was a rank
> > > > amateur when it came to murdering your own people. Commies showed how
> > > > it's done!
> > >
> > >
> > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred
> > > million people called....indians.
> >
> > Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a
> > point.
>
> He never has a point.
Does the universe have a point? Then why should I??
The point is, there is no point.
> However just for the record, it wasn't
> "Americans" that killed huge number of "Indians", it was the Spanish,
> who introducted smallpox and other diseases, and in fairness to the
> Spanish, they had no clue that that was going to happen--I don't think
> they even understood the notion of "infectious disease" in any
> meaningful way, let alone notions like "healthy carrier" and "no
> immunity". Not saying they wouldn't have done it if they had known, but
> they didn't so the point is moot. By the time "Americans" came along,
> those "Indians" were long since dead. Quit a lot of nasty stuff was
> done to the survivors, but that's another story.
"Quite a lot of nasty stuff was done to the survivors, but that's
another story."
Where do I start, at the beginning or the end:
https://www.google.com/#q=the+indian+removal+act
The goal of every president was to 'remove the indians', by any means
necessary.
American Holocaust: D. Stannard (Oxford Press, 1992) – “over 100 million
killed” “[Christopher] Columbus personally murdered half a million
Natives”
“Hitler’s concept of concentration camps as well as the practicality
of genocide owed much, so he claimed, to his studies of English and
United States history. He admired the camps for Boer prisoners in South
Africa and for the Indians in the wild west; and often praised to his
inner circle the efficiency of America’s extermination – by starvation
and uneven combat – of the red savages who could not be tamed by
captivity.”
— P. 202, “Adolph Hitler” by John Toland
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 23:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55FFA4A1.64DB@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #522198 |
J. Clarke wrote: > > In article <anim8rfsk-A00493.23195619092015@news.easynews.com>, > anim8rfsk@cox.net says... > > > > In article <55FE4F8F.6150@ix.netcom.com>, > > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > benj wrote: > > > > > > > > On 09/19/2015 06:00 PM, Rhino wrote: > > > > > On 2015-09-19 5:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > > > > >> In article <qvjLx.16451$sa4.10466@fx09.iad>, none@gmail.com says... > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On 09/19/2015 02:57 PM, Charles H. Sampson wrote: > > > > >>>> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>, > > > > >>>>> csampson@inetworld.net says... > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said: > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as > > > > >>>>>>>> well as > > > > >>>>>>>> political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana > > > > >>>>>>>> Republics, of > > > > >>>>>>>> which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored > > > > >>>>>>>> method is dropping deniers out Helicopters > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as > > > > >>>>>>> actually DOING it, right? > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus > > > > >>>>>> signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute > > > > >>>>>> anybody. > > > > >>>>>> It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to > > > > >>>>>> conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to > > > > >>>>>> see if > > > > >>>>>> they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the > > > > >>>>>> detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the > > > > >>>>>> investigation concludes that that's what they're doing, > > > > >>>>>> prosecution can > > > > >>>>>> follow. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> ... > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful > > > > >>>> evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're > > > > >>>>> going to find a witch whether there is one or not. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against > > > > >>>> organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be > > > > >>>> used in > > > > >>>> other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Charlie > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Cynical? What I call cynical is your assessment that using a law passed > > > > >>> to fight organized crime to attack corporations selling a legal > > > > >>> federally regulated product like tobacco or guns to further some leftist > > > > >>> Lib agenda isn't a witch-hunt and abuse of power. The fact that you > > > > >>> commies have managed to "get away" with your "we know what is best for > > > > >>> you" agenda in no way changes how dishonest it is. > > > > >> > > > > >> You know that calling them "commies" is an insult to commies don't you? > > > > >> Talk to some people who grew up under Communism (half the people I work > > > > >> with did) and you'll find that oppressive as it was, it didn't have the > > > > >> kind of individualized micromanagment that the US seems to be bent on > > > > >> implementing (they micromanaged themselves to destruction, but it was > > > > >> micromanagement on a grand scale, not the "mow your lawn or we'll throw > > > > >> you in jail" kind that is becoming popular in the US). We think we're > > > > >> "better" than they were because we don't shoot dissidents (we apparently > > > > >> reserve that for unarmed teenagers). But we have a higher percentage of > > > > >> our population locked up than the Soviets or the Chinese ever managed > > > > >> and nobody seems to see anything wrong with that except the people who > > > > >> are locked up. > > > > >> > > > > > Have you read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago? He states clearly that > > > > > only 1 in 7 of the people who were sent to the gulag survived their > > > > > sentences. > > > > > In another book, Under the Rubble, written with a fellow political > > > > > prisoner named Igor Shafarevich, he writes that he is absolutely CERTAIN > > > > > 20 million people were sent to the Gulag and thinks it may well have > > > > > been as many as 120 million people. If you then apply the 6-in-7 death > > > > > rate, then AT LEAST 17 million people died there and as many as 102 > > > > > million people. > > > > > > > > > > Do you *seriously* mean to tell me that the US has more than 20 million > > > > > people locked up, let alone 120 million? If so, you are in serious need > > > > > of some reading time to bone up on your facts. > > > > > > > > All the Guinness World Records for Genocide are Held by communist > > > > states. People like to use Hitler as an example, but he was a rank > > > > amateur when it came to murdering your own people. Commies showed how > > > > it's done! > > > > > > > > > But they learned how it's done by watching Americans kill one hundred > > > million people called....indians. > > > > Aside from the part where that's an out and out lie, you don't have a > > point. > > He never has a point. However just for the record, it wasn't > "Americans" that killed huge number of "Indians", it was the Spanish, > who introducted smallpox and other diseases, and in fairness to the > Spanish, they had no clue that that was going to happen--I don't think > they even understood the notion of "infectious disease" in any > meaningful way, let alone notions like "healthy carrier" and "no > immunity". Not saying they wouldn't have done it if they had known, but > they didn't so the point is moot. By the time "Americans" came along, > those "Indians" were long since dead. Quit a lot of nasty stuff was > done to the survivors, but that's another story. I understand Clarke...you're an American Holaucaust denier. It's okay, there are also Jewish Holaucaust deniers... with disagreememnts with...numbers. The question is...are you a global warmer denier???? The only good indian is a dead indian.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-19 17:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.30679cc5b8eceef5989b4a@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #522069 |
In article <1mazvbx.9pua2ougtjk2N%csampson@inetworld.net>, csampson@inetworld.net says... > > J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > > > In article <1maz02q.bglsl6byw589N%csampson@inetworld.net>, > > csampson@inetworld.net says... > > > > > > FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On 2015-09-18 18:53:35 +0000, benj <nobody@gmail.com> said: > > > > > > > > > You said it Starmaker. Hey censorship of political speech as well as > > > > > political prisoners is the traditional way of all Banana Republics, of > > > > > which we have obviously become one. As I understand it, the favored > > > > > method is dropping deniers out Helicopters > > > > > > > > You DO realize that being ASKED to do something isn't the same as > > > > actually DOING it, right? > > > > > > Has anybody actually looked at the two-page petition (one-page plus > > > signatures) cited by the OP? It doesn't ask Obama to prosecute anybody. > > > It is a petition in support of an action proposed by a Senator: to > > > conduct a RICO investigation of groups denying climate change to see if > > > they are obfuscating established science for their profit and to the > > > detriment of people in general. as the tobacco companies did. If the > > > investigation concludes that that's what they're doing, prosecution can > > > follow. > > > > > > ... > > > > If there's no intent to prosecute then why investigate? > > They obviously intend to prosecute if the investigation turns up useful > evidence of wrongdoing. Otherwise, as you say, why prosecute? > > > RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts they're > > going to find a witch whether there is one or not. > > A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against > organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be used in > other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time. So? An injustice "withstanding the test of time" doesn't make it any less an injustice. You argument applies equally well to such institutions as slavery.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-20 10:52 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mtmh75$6d8$1@panix3.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #522069 |
In article <1mazvbx.9pua2ougtjk2N%csampson@inetworld.net>, csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) said: > J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >> RICO is a witch-hunting tool. Once the investigation starts >> they're going to find a witch whether there is one or not. > > A pretty cynical assessment. RICO was enacted as a tool against > organized crime. It was subsequently discovered that it could be > used in other areas. Such uses have withstood the test of time. Well, they've withstood the test of the appeals courts anyway. -- wds
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web