We have a partnership with Webex.  We use their serivce
for cross-firewall app sharing--something that Netmeeting/Messenger
and Sametime require a lot of configuration of firewalls,
authentications, access controls and user training for.
Now Webex has invites, instant meeting launch without any
configuration. Users like it as now they have something to do
in between Web conferences and places to store and author
documents, reschedule meetings, relaunch meetings.  Webex likes
it as people are signed on all the time.
Greg
September 19, 2002
Tadpole's Secure Web Software Subsidiary Endeavors Technology Teams With Web
Meetings Leader WebEx Communications
To Provide Best-of-Breed Solution For Extended Group Collaboration During
and Between Online Meetings
Web meetings raise the quality of team interaction and communications for
users of the Web's secure, P2P collaboration network
###
Tadpole Technology plc, the mobile computing and network infrastructure
group, today announces that its web collaboration subsidiary, Endeavors
Technology, Inc., has teamed with Web meetings leader, WebEx
Communications,Inc. to help professionals make better use of corporate time
and resources, and gain competitive advantage. By integrating the advanced
communications capabilities of the WebEx platform with Endeavors' secure P2P
collaboration network, Endeavors has created a new method of world-class
teamwork and interaction without the hassle of travel.
With the rapid growth in popularity of Web meetings, the rationale for this
world-class relationship stems from the growing need for workgroups around
the world to maintain the quality of the team collaboration experience
between online meetings. The issue by those preferring not to travel is how
to continue to collaborate and share information with team members between
meetings rather than depending on intermittent, insecure email and multiple
copies of constantly changing documents.
Inter-meeting collaboration needs an asynchronous medium, independent of
time. In asynchronous mode, a team member can access, read and edit
information relevant to the meeting group at his/her convenience rather than
having to fit into the schedules and timeframes of others. A secured
environment available only to members of a meeting or project is also
essential.
Endeavors' Magi technology converts the Web into a secure platform for
sharing information directly from people's desktops. WebEx meetings can be
recorded and reviewed at any time, documents shared in the meeting can be
actioned in real-time or at a later date, calendars and project schedules
can be updated at any time, and new individuals added to the workgroup at
will . all in a secure environment with people working across the globe,
inside or outside company firewalls.
Magi peer collaboration securely delivers significant benefits to Web
meeting participants. Not only can they share and access information at
will, but they can also know which other participants are online or
"present." This enables them to chat and message each other, search across
other people's Magi environment, and work jointly on relevant documents
highly productively. With Magi collaboration, in tandem with WebEx
conferencing, the savings can be huge in terms of travel costs, phone bills,
and, most importantly, timely completion of projects and tasks.
"In order to realise the full potential of Web meetings, best-of-breed
services are needed to eliminate time and geographical boundaries," says
Bernard Hulme, Tadpole's group chief executive. "The powerful combination
of Endeavors' Magi and WebEx's communications technologies will assist
global work teams to better meet critical business goals and deadlines by
maintaining teamwork momentum within and between Web meetings."
"WebEx is transforming the way businesses use the Web for sales, marketing,
training, support and product design," says David Farrington, vice president
of corporate development at WebEx Communications. "By integrating the
communications capabilities of the WebEx platform with Endeavors' secure
collaboration network, Endeavors has created an offering that provides the
best in synchronous and asynchronous communications."
About Magi
Magi Enterprise 3.0, an award-winning web collaboration system, transforms
today's Web into a highly secure inter- and intra-enterprise collaboration
network of files and web resources. For the first time, enterprises can
implement ad-hoc Virtual Private Networks for collaboration very rapidly and
affordably without disrupting existing applications, networks or work
practices. Magi Enterprise 3.0 does this by effectively transforming
unsecured, "read-only" Web networks into two-way trusted and transparent
collaboration environments, through the use of such features as
cross-firewall connections, advanced data extraction, an intuitive graphical
interface, and universal name spaces generating "follow me URLs" for mobile
professionals.
About Endeavors Technology, Inc.
Endeavors Technology, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of mobile computing
and network infrastructure vendor Tadpole Technology plc (LSE-TAD,
www.tadpole.com), which has plants and offices in Irvine and Carlsbad
(California), and Cambridge, Edinburgh, and Bristol (UK). For further
information on Endeavors' P2P solutions, call 949-833-2800, email to
p2p@endeavors.com, or visit the company's website
ends
For further information, please contact:
Bernard Hulme, Tadpole Technology - via Patcom Media
Hugh Paterson, Patcom Media - Tel 0207 987 4888, Email
hughp@patcom-media.com
Bullets for Editors
WebEx
Web communications services (synchronous): network-based platform for
delivering highly interactive, visually dynamic Web communications. The
WebEx platform supports real-time data, voice and video communications.
WebEx is the only company to design, develop and deploy a global network for
real-time Web communications.
Magi
On and off-line (asynchronous) communication and collaboration: cross
enterprise search and discovery, transparent security and trust (SSL & PKI),
2-way web access to files and applications, permanent cross firewall access,
ad hoc and permanent secure groups, centralized or decentralized control of
access lists and security privileges, centralized caching of information
(never lose anything critical), multi-device access to information (desktop,
laptop, PDA).


On Thursday, Sep 19, 2002, at 14:51 Europe/London, Bill Kearney wrote:
>> From the completely unrelated but funny department...
>
> "Talk like a Pirate Day".
>
>
> Which is today, of course.
>
> That and 'piratecore' rapping style...
> #81798893
>
> Anything, just anything, to get us off the geek dating tips topic....
>
> -Bill Kearney
>
Arrr, he be a scurvy dog, that Bill Kearney.


Ben Hammersley wrote:
>
> On Thursday, Sep 19, 2002, at 14:51 Europe/London, Bill Kearney wrote:
>
>>> From the completely unrelated but funny department...
>>
>>
>> "Talk like a Pirate Day".
>>
>>
>> Which is today, of course.
>>
>> That and 'piratecore' rapping style...
>> #81798893
>>
>> Anything, just anything, to get us off the geek dating tips topic....
>>
>> -Bill Kearney
>>
>
>
> Arrr, he be a scurvy dog, that Bill Kearney.
Well, shiver me timbers, but my favorite pirate phrase is missing from
both of those.Arrr....
and wondering if there's a rap equivalent.
Owen

*Q AND A SECTION*
*SHIVER MY TIMBERS*
/From Tad Spencer/: "Please could you tell me where the phrase /shiver
my timbers/ originated?"
This is one of those supposedly nautical expressions that seem to be
better known through a couple of appearances in fiction than by any
actual sailors' usage.
It's an exclamation that may allude to a ship striking some rock or
other obstacle so hard that her timbers shiver, or shake, so implying a
calamity has occurred. It is first recorded as being used by Captain
Frederick Marryat in /Jacob Faithful/ in 1835: "I won't thrash you Tom.
Shiver my timbers if I do".
It has gained a firm place in the language because almost fifty years
later Robert Louis Stevenson found it to be just the kind of old-salt
saying that fitted the character of Long John Silver in /Treasure
Island/: "Cross me, and you'll go where many a good man's gone before
you ... some to the yard-arm, shiver my timbers, and some by the board,
and all to feed the fishes". Since then, it's mainly been the preserve
of second-rate seafaring yarns.


Geege Schuman wrote:
> less obscure haiku
>
> buy a puppy, ro!
> they are chick magnets. master
> ventriloquism.
Reminds me of a Gary Larson cartoon,
woman walking dog, man walking aligator,
dog mostly eaten by aligator, thought cloud
above man's head,
"This is *such* a great way to meet chicks!"
- Joe


Ahhhh Dave Winer..Seems like only yesterday fork was knee deep in
winerrants..hes gone away though...so sad (insert real honest to goshness
tears)
But the past  live on...in the archives...
Remeber when Dave was being betrayed by O'Reilly?

On "closed source" justifications

Daves trys to grok fork

NT runs just as good as linux...really

There are a few months of this stuff (just google or forkcrawl the
archives) then he got truly fedup with all our  not polite unfresh
thinking and went silent, for the most part.
oh well, back to life.
-tom


> Chuck Murcko wrote:
>
> > Heh, ten years ago saying the exact same words was most definitely not
> > "parroting the party line".
> >
> > It was even less so thirty years ago. My story remains the same, take
> > it or leave it. I've said the same words to white supremacists as to
> > suburban leftist punks as to homeys as to French Irish, etc. etc.:
> >
> > I don't have to agree with anything you say. I *am* obligated to
> > defend to the death your right to say it. I don't give a rat's ass
> > where you say it, even in France. I don't care where the political
> > pendulum has swung currently.
> >
> > Chuck
>
>
> I had to laugh at Rumsfield yesterday - when he was heckled by
> protestors, he said something like "They couldn't do that in Iraq."
> Meanwhile, from what I could tell, the protestors were being arrested.
>
> Owen
Trying to shoutdown a speaker or being loud and rowdy while someone else is
trying to speak (in the vernacular, 'getting in their face') is rude and
disrespectful.  And persistently getting in someones face is assault, a
criminal offense. If these people have something to say, they can say it
with signs or get their own venue.  And here is something else to chew on...
these protesters are NOT interested in changing anyones mind about what
Rumsfield is saying. How likely are you to change someone's mind by being
rude and disrespectful to them? Is this how to win friends and influence
people? Either these folks are social misfits who have no understanding of
human interactions (else they would try more constructive means to get their
message across) or they are just out to get their rocks off regardless of
how it affects other people, and that is immoral at best and downright evil
at worst.
Bill


Bill Stoddard wrote:
>>Chuck Murcko wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Heh, ten years ago saying the exact same words was most definitely not
>>>"parroting the party line".
>>>
>>>It was even less so thirty years ago. My story remains the same, take
>>>it or leave it. I've said the same words to white supremacists as to
>>>suburban leftist punks as to homeys as to French Irish, etc. etc.:
>>>
>>>I don't have to agree with anything you say. I *am* obligated to
>>>defend to the death your right to say it. I don't give a rat's ass
>>>where you say it, even in France. I don't care where the political
>>>pendulum has swung currently.
>>>
>>>Chuck
>>>
>>>
>>I had to laugh at Rumsfield yesterday - when he was heckled by
>>protestors, he said something like "They couldn't do that in Iraq."
>>Meanwhile, from what I could tell, the protestors were being arrested.
>>
>>Owen
>>
>>
>
>Trying to shoutdown a speaker or being loud and rowdy while someone else is
>trying to speak (in the vernacular, 'getting in their face') is rude and
>disrespectful.  And persistently getting in someones face is assault, a
>criminal offense. If these people have something to say, they can say it
>with signs or get their own venue.  And here is something else to chew on...
>these protesters are NOT interested in changing anyones mind about what
>Rumsfield is saying. How likely are you to change someone's mind by being
>rude and disrespectful to them? Is this how to win friends and influence
>people? Either these folks are social misfits who have no understanding of
>human interactions (else they would try more constructive means to get their
>message across) or they are just out to get their rocks off regardless of
>how it affects other people, and that is immoral at best and downright evil
>at worst.
>
>Bill
>
>
Polite and respectful protest is acceptable then. No dumping tea in the
harbour or anything like that.
I think the primary purpose of loud and rowdy protests is to get on
television, and that the tactics can be
justified as a reaction to a systematic removal of alternative
viewpoints from that medium. On the other hand,
it was a priceless TV moment. There was nothing resembling assault, and
the protestors were not in anybody's face
(at least in my understanding of the vernacular).
And no, being rude and disrespectful is not the way to influence
politicians, but the standard way of using lobbyists and
writing checks is beyond many of us.
Owen


On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
--]How likely are you to change someone's mind by being
--]rude and disrespectful to them? Is this how to win friends and influence
--]people?
Point the first, I doubt if they are trying to change Rumsy's mind but
rather to show others that there is a vocal and violent opposition to his
views. With such flagrant showings of opposition there would be more
coverage of the opposing ideas and thus the spreading of the dissenting
meme. A viri need not comply with the wishes of the attacked host, rather
the host had better make some antibodies or learn to adapt.
Point the second. Historicaly the "in yer face" mode of confrontation has
been used to gain popular support and to grow from seeds "grass roots"
movements. Witness the big bold "in yer face" signature of Hancock on the
"in yer  face" Declaration of the american colonies to the governing
powers of england. Witness also the chicago seven, Others will follow in
examplare  form upon digging.
Now point the third, is it annoying? Yes, and if your annoyed then the "in
yer facers" have done thier job. Sad to say the polite persnikiters are
teh very fule the "in yer facers" hope to ignite. If your burning, your
being used.
Pointed the personal...The politics of the polite are more often the
refuge of backstabings,  closed mouth recourlessness and hypocritcal
behavoirs. Id rather hear what those who oppose me have to say than
quietly be knifed by the slow hand of the coward.
Seek not the polite or impolite but rather the reasons why.
-tom


Owen Byrne writes:
> [quoting
> *SHIVER MY TIMBERS*
>
> /From Tad Spencer/: "Please could you tell me where the phrase /shiver
> my timbers/ originated?"
>
> This is one of those supposedly nautical expressions that seem to be
> better known through a couple of appearances in fiction than by any
> actual sailors' usage.
>
> It's an exclamation that may allude to a ship striking some rock or
> other obstacle so hard that her timbers shiver, or shake, so implying a
> calamity has occurred. It is first recorded as being used by Captain
> Frederick Marryat in /Jacob Faithful/ in 1835: "I won't thrash you Tom.
> Shiver my timbers if I do".
It seems implausible to me that "shiver" here means "to shake"; I don't
recall seeing the word used transitively in that sense, and web1913
lists that sense as "v. i.", or intransitive.  The transitive sense of
"shiver", which we no longer use but which people used widely in the
1800s (web1913 doesn't even list it as archaic or obsolete), means
"to shatter into splinters, normally with a blow".
Shivering a boat's timbers, of course, leaves you with no boat.
(Shivering some of them, which will happen if you hit a rock hard enough,
leaves you with a sinking boat.)
So, "Shiver my timbers if I do," can be reasonably interpreted as a more
vivid way of saying, "May I die suddenly if I do."  The interpretation
suggested by Quinion, "May my boat be damaged," neither makes as much
sense in context nor obeys the normal rules of grammar.
I've sent a copy of this to Quinion.


> On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> --]How likely are you to change someone's mind by being
> --]rude and disrespectful to them? Is this how to win friends and
> influence
> --]people?
>
> Point the first, I doubt if they are trying to change Rumsy's mind but
> rather to show others that there is a vocal and violent opposition to his
> views. With such flagrant showings of opposition there would be more
> coverage of the opposing ideas and thus the spreading of the dissenting
> meme. A viri need not comply with the wishes of the attacked host, rather
> the host had better make some antibodies or learn to adapt.
>
> Point the second. Historicaly the "in yer face" mode of confrontation has
> been used to gain popular support and to grow from seeds "grass roots"
> movements. Witness the big bold "in yer face" signature of Hancock on the
> "in yer  face" Declaration of the american colonies to the governing
> powers of england. Witness also the chicago seven, Others will follow in
> examplare  form upon digging.
>
> Now point the third, is it annoying? Yes, and if your annoyed then the "in
> yer facers" have done thier job. Sad to say the polite persnikiters are
> teh very fule the "in yer facers" hope to ignite. If your burning, your
> being used.
>
> Pointed the personal...The politics of the polite are more often the
> refuge of backstabings,  closed mouth recourlessness and hypocritcal
> behavoirs. Id rather hear what those who oppose me have to say than
> quietly be knifed by the slow hand of the coward.
>
>
>
> Seek not the polite or impolite but rather the reasons why.
>
>
> -tom
Good points all but they don't apply in this case.  Someone is speaking and
a group of selfish bastards only interested in getting their rocks off are
trying to shout him down (they are doing it because 'it's good for the
soul'. Kind like Chuckie Manson doing the stuff he did cause 'it was good
for his soul'). Unprincipled and evil. It's got nothing to do with throwing
tea in the harbor or the DoI.
Bill


What I meant was that neither he nor anyone else has any *authority* to
say something can or can't be published, and make that stick, at least
in the US, and from some descriptions, France. Of course he can say
anything he wants. And I can choose to ignore it, or not. Works both
ways.
Fscking semantics.
Chuck
On Thursday, September 19, 2002, at 06:41 AM, Russell Turpin wrote:
> Robert Harley:
>>> BTW, I wasn't aware that the 1st Amendment mandated that crap must be
>>> FoRKed.
>
> Chuck Murcko
:
>> It doesn't, BTW. It says the right to free speech shall not be
>> abridged. That means *you* can't say anything may not be FoRKed or
>> printed or whatever.
>
> Actually, it means just the opposite. The first
> amendment guarantees Harley's right to say just
> that. For the outlets where he has editorial
> control, it even guarantees his right to CENSOR
> content published through those outlets. The
> first amendment doesn't limit Harley's speech,
> and it is neutral with regard to the selection
> policies of FoRK and other private venues.
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
>
>


On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Bill Stoddard wrote:
--]Good points all but they don't apply in this case.  Someone is speaking and
--]a group of selfish bastards only interested in getting their rocks off are
--]trying to shout him down (they are doing it because 'it's good for the
--]soul'. Kind like Chuckie Manson doing the stuff he did cause 'it was good
--]for his soul'). Unprincipled and evil. It's got nothing to do with throwing
--]tea in the harbor or the DoI.
History is written by the victors. If the rabble can put forth there ideas
they will be tempered in the pages of yore as "strong willed voices
decrying the obvious injustices of the day"
Once again, look at the Chicago 7, a loud and rude a crowd of selfish
pricks as you were want to find in the day. History of course colors them
with times great blur filter. The jagged bits that , at the time, were
called rude and obnoxious are now seen as a stab of justive doing in the
sideof the ill pathed goverment.


> For my part, I'd rather people didn't use FoRK as a place in which to dump an
> expression of their political beliefs.
I'll second that, although with emphasis
upon /dump/, rather than on /political/.
I don't mind if people advocate nuking
gay baby whales for jesus, if they can
make a good, original, argument for it.
I do mind if someone should attempt to
further the notion that 1+1=2, merely
by cut-and-pasting a few pages of W&R.
"New bits" are not a temporal property;
we create them when we add context or
clarification to the old bits of others'
thoughts.
-Dave
::::::::::::
>     ... being rude and disrespectful is not the way to influence
> politicians, but the standard way of using lobbyists and
> writing checks is beyond many of us.
The standard way has some extreme precedents:
> Q: When was the Roman empire sold, and who bought it?
>
> A: On March 28th, 193 AD, the Roman empire was auctioned off by the
> Praetorian guards to the wealthy senator Didius Julianus for the price
> of 6250 drachms per soldier.
(as found in
,
quoting Gibbon)
Now, an economist might argue that selling
offices is the most efficient way to fill
them (what would Coase say?), but wouldn't
that convince everyone (but the supporters
of plutocracy) that efficiency is not the
primary virtue of politics?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kragen Sitaker"
> > It's an exclamation that may allude to a ship striking some rock or
> > other obstacle so hard that her timbers shiver, or shake, so implying a
> > calamity has occurred. It is first recorded as being used by Captain
> > Frederick Marryat in /Jacob Faithful/ in 1835: "I won't thrash you Tom.
> > Shiver my timbers if I do".
I think it went like this: "I won't thrash you Tom, if you shiver my
timber..."
Or maybe that was just the butt pirates...


Just tried smartgroups: The layout of pages is pretty challenging to
use quickly, but the most interesting aspect is that once you are in,
there is no way to get out.  You can unsubscribe yourself as the sole
member of a group, but you cannot delete the group.
Or if you can, I couldn't find it before deleting myself, and now it's
invisible to me.  Another interesting thing: Security forms are reset
to full-public settings each time you load them, rather than set from
your current settings.
All in all, I wasn't impressed and have stayed with the Yahooligans
for another run.
--
Gary Lawrence Murphy - garym@teledyn.com - TeleDynamics Communications
- blog: ~teledyn - biz:  -
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." (Picasso)


On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Mr. FoRK wrote:
--]I think it went like this: "I won't thrash you Tom, if you shiver my
--]timber..."
--]Or maybe that was just the butt pirates...
--]
How did I get wrangled into this thread?
Do I really need to make pewp deck jokes at this point.
Arrrrg ye mateys, now best ya be off tis topic or Ill hoist my jib and
hope for a stiff wind. Arrrg when Im happy and arrrg when Im not.


On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 11:11:47AM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> people? Either these folks are social misfits who have no understanding of
> human interactions (else they would try more constructive means to get their
> message across) or they are just out to get their rocks off regardless of
> how it affects other people, and that is immoral at best and downright evil
> at worst.
Are you kidding? It was fucking BRILLIANT. Do you know what exposure that got
them? They sat perfectly so that the cameras could focus on the mildly
exasperated Rumsfeld and their "UN Inspections not war" banner. That picture
will be dominating the news cycles in China, Iraq, Russia, Germany, and
France, at least. For goodness sakes, you're arguing about it on FoRK. In
politics by sound-bite, those two rude hags kicked ass and took names.
For the record, I don't think they even got arrested, which is a shame. It
is part of the game -- make an ass of yourself, get your point on the nightly
news, spend a couple days in the clink for disorderly.
--
njl


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 19 Sep 2002 22:18:46 -0400
From: Perry E. Metzger
To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com
Subject: Sun donates elliptic curve code to OpenSSL?
According to this:

Sun is donating some elliptic curve code to the OpenSSL project. Does
anyone know details that they would care to share on the nature of the
donation?
--
Perry E. Metzger		perry@piermont.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com


In a message dated 9/19/2002 3:45:45 PM, dl@silcom.com writes:
>I don't mind if people advocate nuking
>gay baby whales for jesus, if they can
>make a good, original, argument for it.
I can't imagine any other kind of argument for nuking gay baby whales for
jesus. But do you mean nuking baby gay whales who are for jesus; or nuking
baby gay whales for Jesus's sake?
splitting hairs with a FoRK,
Tom


Well, it looks like Sun are going ahead with
their ubiquitous computing plans without Mithril.
Greg
Reuters Market News
Sun Micro Outlines Roadmap for Managing Networks
Friday September 20, 5:00 am ET
By Peter Henderson
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Computer maker Sun Microsystems Inc. on Thursday
said it would create in a few years a network environment that will be as
straightforward to handle as a single machine, a strategy it calls N1.
It laid out a road map for a new layer of intelligent software and systems that will meld
unwieldy networks into easy-to-use systems, a goal similar to those of most rivals
making computers which manage networks.
EMC Corp. announced this week software aimed at allowing users to manage storage
resources as a pool. Hewlett-Packard Co has a Utility Data Center, designed for
broader management. International Business Machines Corp's project eLiza is working
to make computers "self-healing" when systems break.
"Applications still have to run zeroes and ones on some computing engine but the
whole idea behind N1 is you stop thinking about that. You don't think about what box
it is running on," Sun Vice President Steve MacKay, head of the N1 program, said in an
interview on the sidelines of a Sun user conference.
Many industry executives see computer power eventually being sold like power or
water, as a utility that can be turned on or off, in whatever volume one wants whenever
needed.
For that to happen computers must be tied together seamlessly, rather than cobbling
them together with tenuous links, as most networks do today, experts say. There are
still major barriers, though, such as communications standards for machines from
different vendors to interoperate closely.
Sun promised to deliver a "virtualization engine" that would let administrators look at
their entire network as a pool by the end of the year. Network administrators today
often have no automatic system to report what is in the network.
"It'll tell you what you have and how it is laid out," promised MacKay
The second stage, beginning in 2003, would allow users to identify a service, such as
online banking, and allocate resources for them with a few clicks, Sun said.
Finally, in 2004, Sun's software should allow networks to change uses of resources on
the fly in response to changing needs, such as a bank assuring quicker online response
time for priority users, the company said.


> On Thu, Sep 19, 2002 at 11:11:47AM -0400, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> > people? Either these folks are social misfits who have no
> understanding of
> > human interactions (else they would try more constructive means
> to get their
> > message across) or they are just out to get their rocks off
> regardless of
> > how it affects other people, and that is immoral at best and
> downright evil
> > at worst.
>
> Are you kidding? It was fucking BRILLIANT. Do you know what
> exposure that got
> them? They sat perfectly so that the cameras could focus on the mildly
> exasperated Rumsfeld and their "UN Inspections not war" banner.
What I am specifically referring to is protesters shouting down speakers or
making so much noise that it interferes with the speaker. That's wrong,
immoral and unethical no matter what the political bent of the speakers and
the protesters. Rowdy protests in their own venue (on a college campus or
some of the commons areas of DC) is perfectly fine by me. Waving signs to
get attention is fine.
> That picture
> will be dominating the news cycles in China, Iraq, Russia, Germany, and
> France, at least. For goodness sakes, you're arguing about it on FoRK. In
> politics by sound-bite, those two rude hags kicked ass and took names.
>
> For the record, I don't think they even got arrested, which is a shame.
Well, Owen implied the protesters were arrested. Was he just jacking himself
off at the expense of other people? Exactly why is it a shame that they were
not arrested? Think about what you are saying and what you are telegraphing
about your state of mind here. You WANT people to do bad things (ie, police
arresting peaceful protesters) if it can help you further your cause? That
attitude just sucks. You have no moral ground to stand on if that is what
you believe.
> It is part of the game -- make an ass of yourself, get your point on
> the nightly
> news, spend a couple days in the clink for disorderly.
Sure, just don't whine about getting arrested if you make it a point to get
in someone's face.
One other comment... Most of the people that are protesting against taking
out the Iraqi dictator wouldn't give a rats ass if a nuke went off in NYC.
They simply wouldn't care so why in the hell should the Americal public
listen to them on matters of national security?
So enlighten me, exactly why shouldn't Hussein be taken out? And if your
answr boils down to "i don't give a shit about what happens to the US", you
can kiss my ass :-)
Bill


I'm sure Patton used it.
I'm all for using it in the coming war with Iraq.
Yet I'd be queasy about doing it in the Philippines circa 1905, which
was his point.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fork-admin@xent.com  On Behalf Of R.
A.
> Hettinga
> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 9:44 PM
> To: Digital Bearer Settlement List; fork@spamassassin.taint.org
> Subject:
The War Prayer
>
>
> --- begin forwarded text
>
>
> Status: RO
> Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 14:57:27 -0700
> To: nettime-l@bbs.thing.net
> From: Phil Duncan
> Subject:
The War Prayer
> Sender: nettime-l-request@bbs.thing.net
> Reply-To: Phil Duncan
>
> The following prayer is from a story by Mark Twain, and was quoted by
> Lewis
> Laphan in the October issue of Harper's magazine. It occurs at the
very
> end
> of an excellent article which I recommend to you.
>
> In the story, an old man enters a church where the congregation has
been
> listening to an heroic sermon about "the glory to be won in battle by
> young
> patriots armed with the love of God." He usurps the pulpit and prays
the
> following:
>
> "O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreads with
our
> shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of
their
> patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the
shrieks of
> their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble
homes
> with
> a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending
> widows
> with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their
little
> children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in
rags
> and
> hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames in summer and the icy
winds of
> winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the
refuge
> of
> the grave and denied it -- for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast
their
> hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make
heavy
> their
> steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the
> blood
> of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is
the
> Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all
that
> are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts.
Amen."
>
> Twain wrote the story, "The War Prayer," in 1905 during the American
> occupation of the Philippines, but the story wasn't printed until
1923,
> thirteen years after his death, because the editors thought it
> "unsuitable"
> for publication at the time it was written.
>
> #  distributed via
: no commercial use without permission
> #
is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg
body
> #  archive:  contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net
>
> --- end forwarded text
>
>
> --
> -----------------
> R. A. Hettinga
> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation
> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
> "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
> [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
> experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'


........... with our telecoms partner Bumblebee !
Don't get ripped off by expensive hotel, payphone and mobile charges.
SAVE, SAVE, SAVE on international calls with Ryanair's phone partner.
************************************************************************
*********
You'll save up to 70% on international phone calls when you use our
online phone card.  You can use the card from any phone in any country
you visit and you won't have to worry about high phone charges
when you call home or the office.
Buying a card couldn't be easier and it's totally secure.  Simply go to

to avail of this special offer for Ryanair customers.
It's another great deal from Ryanair and our online phone
partner, Bumblebee Communications.
=====================================================================
E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
This e-mail and any files and attachments transmitted with it
are confidential and may be legally privileged. They are intended
solely for the use of the intended recipient.  Any views and
opinions expressed are those of the individual author/sender
and are not necessarily shared or endorsed by Ryanair Holdings plc
or any associated or related company. In particular e-mail
transmissions are not binding for the purposes of forming
a contract to sell airline seats, directly or via promotions,
and do not form a contractual obligation of any type.
Such contracts can only be formed in writing by post or fax,
duly signed by a senior company executive, subject to approval
by the Board of Directors.
The content of this e-mail or any file or attachment transmitted
with it may have been changed or altered without the consent
of the author.  If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail,
you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, disclosure,
alteration, printing, circulation or transmission of, or any
action taken or omitted in reliance on this e-mail or any file
or attachment transmitted with it is prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received this e-mail in error
please notify Ryanair Holdings plc by emailing postmaster@ryanair.ie
or contact Ryanair Holdings plc, Dublin Airport, Co Dublin, Ireland.
---
You are currently subscribed to customers as: zzzz-ryanair@spamassassin.taint.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-customers-949326K@mail.ryanairmail.com