From: Eeyore on


jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:

> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
> >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >Expect BAH to now suggest that the agriculture in California is
> >> >> >> >> >about to collapse.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> It already has. Adding the burden of a minimum wage hike will
> >> >> >> >> make it worse.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >I truly don't believe it !
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Now read the past few weeks' weather reports.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >What would I find there ?
> >> >>
> >> >> Snow and freezing temperatures. Sigh! You claimed that
> >> >> you knew more than I about the real news.
> >> >
> >> >Since when is a local weather report *news* ???
> >>
> >> When it destroys the season's agriculture crop. You should look
> >> at a map. California isn't quite a "local" area; it's very large.
> >
> >I know but California weather's not terribly relevant to me.
>
> It is indirectly.

Oh sure in a very small way but I'm not going to fret over a single year's bad
weather. It's bad enough with all the 'global warming' hype.


> >> >> So why haven't you heard nor learned about the two (California mess and
> >> >> Democrat leadership visits)?
> >> >
> >> >What's that got to do with anything ?
> >>
> >> The issue is your claim that you know more about what's going on
> >> in the world than I do. The discussion drifted to economies
> >> and the effects of forcing a depressed piece of the economy to
> >> raise its costs when it's not going to make much money this year.
> >
> >The effect of a single year is relatively minute. It would become news if
> >this started happeneing every year and affected the economy of the area on a
> >long-term basis
>
> Small things affect all economies on a long-term basis in this
> age of global technology and trade.

Small things have small effects. Don't get over-excited about it.


> >> Underlying these discussions is the fact that the Democrat leadership
> >> is insane with no grasp on reality. If there should be a minimum
> >> wage, the price-setting belongs to the states and not the federal
> >> government.
> >
> >This is only *your view* though.
> >
> >To me the Republicans are the insane ones. After all they're the ones running
> >a huge budget deficit and spending 10% of the US GDP on a pointless war.
>
> It is your opinion that countering Islamic extremism is pointless.

Absolutely not !

The events of the last few years have made us in the UK for example more aware of
the 'culture gap' between traditional tolerant British values and the extreme
intolerance and disinclinate to integrate espoused by some Muslims. It's something
we need to deal with and it's a hot topic now. We cannot accept intolerance in our
society no matter how 'liberal' we may be.

Graham

From: jmfbahciv on
In article <45B38906.1C78E8FF(a)hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
>
>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
>> >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
>> >> >> Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan(a)easystreet.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>France didn't act until the field tests of urban riots happened.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >I vaguely recollect something here, but again need details.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This was last summer. France had urban riots and seemed to
>> >> >> be out of their Muslim workers. But the only people who seemed
>> >> >> to be making messes were the kids.
>> >> >
>> >> >They're the ones most pissed off because they can't get jobs or maybe
only
>> >> >menial ones.
>> >>
>> >> Instead of voting or using other legal means,
>> >
>> >There's no-one to vote for that has much interest in their concerns -
least
>> >of all having any chance of being elected.
>>
>> Exactly. That's why Europe has a boiling cauldron in their
>> midst.
>
>In this instance. I don't think it's yet a 'cauldron' actually.

It is. You just haven't noticed that it's almost overflowing.
The field testing of inciting riots reminded me of the 60s
and 70s in the US when SDS did a similar thing.

>
>
>> >Do you recall something about 'taxation without representation' and how
that
>> >ended up ? There was some rioting involved IIRC !
>>
>> Only because your king was particularly woodenheaded about dealing
>> with his colonies.
>
>Yes.
>
>The French need to be less woodenheaded about talking to their Muslims.
>
>Hey, I thought you were of the opinion that negotiating with 'the enemy' was
weak
>? Is this a change of tack ?

Moderates aren't the enemy...yet. You need to also notice that
France is not the only country in Europe who has been importing
"cheap" labor. When countries (or empires) stop doing their
own work and their own fighting, their civilization begins
to crumble. This seems to be the two common ingredients
for the collapses I've been studying. Note that I wrote _seems_.

/BAH
From: jmfbahciv on
In article <45B395A0.B33F63B1(a)hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
>
>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> Use eeyore's knowledge as a metric. If you learn that and then
>> >> listen to the BBC, which is proably his primary indirect source
>> >> of news, you can figure out a lot.
>> >
>> >I'd rather use the BBC as a news source which is under worldwide scrutiny
>> >than wherever you get your barking mad ideas from.
>> >
>> >I use multiple news sources in fact, including some right wing ones and a
>> >number of overseas sources.
>>
>> A few years ago, probably more, I did a trace of news sources. A
>> lot of them originated from BBC-paid reporters because it's
>> expensive to have a reporter in every country and capital and
>> surrounding areas. So quite a bit of this news has a BBC origination
>> and, therefore, cannot be used as a bias check for what the BBC
>> broadcasts.
>
>More absurd obfuscation.
>
>Have you never heard of AP and Reuters for example ?

Yes. And they used the feeds from one BBC reporter.

Now all humans have their own biases. If a news item has
no other human double-checking the original story, there
is a problem. When this happens for all news items that
aren't the object of media feeding frenzies, there can
be big messes in the future.


> Much as it an truly first
>class news organisation, the BBC doesdn't supply the bulk of the world's
news.
>
>Even here in the UK we have Sky News ( part of Murdoch's right leaning News
>Corporation ) and ITN as serious news broadcasting companies too.

Now try to trace where an item started, who reported it, and who
picked up the initial report, reworded it to avoid copyright
infringements, and then published the rewrite. Each time
it gets rewritten, the facts become muddies. That's how a
sound bite of a US politician uttered in Europe ends up being
fact by the time it's reported by US media. Then this "fact"
gets picked up by European media and the sound bite has turned
into a fact that must be dealt with. Then the politician, who
started this word cascade, takes a poll to see how the US
voters reacted. That's how the 2004 US Presidential Democrat primaries
were run. They were copying the Clintons' administrative techniques.

/BAH


From: jmfbahciv on
In article <45B39904.E8EAACB(a)hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
>
>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >jasen wrote:
>> >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I'm talking about monitoring without interfering with the performance.
>> >>
>> >> Any additional software you run will reduce performance (by using up
>> >> computer cycles and ram), wether the reduction is significant is upto
>> >> you to decide. if your computer is upto the task monitoring needn't
>> >> reduce your the speed of your internet connection.
>> >
>> >She's got a 486.
>>
>> And, until the disk strictioned, a 386.
>
>I never had one of those.

<GRIN> I knew you were very young.

> A V30 based PC initially then jumped to 486.

>> >SX25 CPU even maybe ?
>>
>> No.
>
>Well that's something at least.
>
>DX4 ?

I'm pretty sure it's a 66 but I can't remember if JMF needed
the arithmetic. The 386 was a D because I was going to
do stuff.

/BAH
From: jmfbahciv on
In article <bgm7r2dkmefu249beuj1vj6ug030r26m6o(a)4ax.com>,
MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
>On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 18:09:36 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell"
><mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> Gave us:
>
>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm talking about monitoring without interfering with the performance.
>>
>>
>> You obviously know absolutely nothing about electronics. Its done
>>every day, with the proper equipment. What do you think an
>>oscilloscope, voltmeter, or frequency counter does? Yes, they may
>>affect the circuit under test, but usually not enough to notice.
>>Especially in low impedance circuits.
>
>
> Does anyone remember "Tempest" shielding measures?
>
> A car could sit out on the street and read your CRT display with the
>right gear.
>
> Just not on the PCs I made for the big boys. Our screen glass alone
>was over $400 each (at 17"), and it was just a thin glass with a
>conductive optical coating and metallized edges!

JMF was using a VT05. His screen would duplicate on my black
and white TV two rooms over (about 25 feet). I warned him
to tell me when he was going online and then I'd turn my TV
off.

/BAH