Stupid ASCII loader prompt
tedm at toybox.placo.com
Thu Mar 17 23:25:05 PST 2005
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Jerry
> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 11:53 AM
> To: "Marco Greene (ML)"
> Cc: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Stupid ASCII loader prompt
> Well, by now we are gleefully off topic for this list, so...
Why not! ;-)
> The USA system attempts/purports to _protect_ the minorities. This
> exists because supposedly the system tries to protect everyone, not
> specifically the minorities. It is only an artifact that sometimes
> minorities find themselves able to use the system to influence some
> outcome. They do not seize control. They wield whatever
> they can muster, but they do not seize control.
What control exists, they do seize. Certainly, much of the actual
of the US system resides lower down in the food chain among the
bureaucrats who survive administration after administration, regardless
who happens to be at the top. But, there still is a lot of real power at
the top, and the people at the top are also able to make decisions that
implications that stretch far, far beyond their own brief period in
As for example the decision to invade Iraq. Long after the Republicans
out of power, the US is still going to be involved there. Because by
time there will have been such a great loss of American life that even
the strongest Democrat will not be able to pull out, because the hawks
will claim that if he does he's throwing away everything that that large
number of soldiers have given their lives for, and nobody will be able to
survive that kind of criticism.
As a result we will have permanent military bases there. And as a result
we will have to keep going back in there year after year whenever the
population there (who really does not want bases) manages to get a strong
enough government in place that can threaten those bases existence. And
also, Saudi Arabia wants us in there because that way we will control oil
production, and thus not destroy OPEC's power. Iraq is the only country
in the world that has the oil reserves large enough to destroy OPEC if
they wished, and OPEC is Saudi Arabia's child. And independent Iraq with
it's own government has always been a threat to OPEC and now that is
And because of all of this, our Energy policy has been permanently
to be oil-based. We will never be able to return to conservation, solar,
geothermal and so on. The dial has been stuck on Oil and will remain
until all oil reserves in Saudia Arabia and Iraq have been completely
out. And because of that, American soldiers will continue to die over
until that happens in maybe a century or so. And this is -exactly- what
the ultraconservatives want. They wanted a US that is the world's
with an economy that supports a tremendous military-industrial complex,
and that is what they got.
> Next, it was not exactly a failure. The use of alcohol went down
> very significantly.
We don't really have any way of knowing that because none of this
stuff was tracked, as it was illegal. And you might consider too that
a still isn't practical in a densely populated area, it is likely
that out West where the population density was much lower, that
they were far more common than anyone would believe.
> Sure, each 'ultra' group contains the seeds/tools of its own
No, not true. The Amish for example are definitely an off-the-bend
group, but they have a consistent internal philosophy, and the way they
apply their philosophy is non hypocritical, thus they survive. The
the super-Mormons, even the survivalists, there are many of these
groups that are non-hypocritical in the application end. As a result
don't carry the seeds of their own destruction. Rather, there are other
reasons that they can never grow beyond a small minority.
There's plenty of stuff that you can fault the ultraliberals for,
no common sense) but hypocrisy is not one of them. That particular
is a speciality of the ultraconservatives.
> So, lets leave this topic at that. Either the
> ultra-anti-beastie or ultra-pro-beastie movements will destroy
The ultra-pro-beastie movement is defined as the status quo, so it's
impossible for it to destroy itself (except perhaps by apathy)
More information about the freebsd-questions