PRC as a amplifier in GPS question.

Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Soundhaspriority wrote:
keithr@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message 48accf3f@dnews.tpgi.com.au
The US is the only country that I have visited that
finds it necessary to arm their immigration officials, I am not sure
what
they are scared of.

PEOPLE LIKE YOU!

http://robertmorein.blogspot.com/

It's the imposter not the real Bob. Ignore !

Is there some way, other than the content of the post,
to tell them apart?
Do you know how to look at headers ? The imposter posts from Buzzard news.

Graham
 
Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
keithr wrote:
History and geography are not really strong subjects in
America are they?
I'd love to see an American history book. They must get
these ideas from somewhere.
Thanks for admitting that you know very little about American history or
geography.

I bet I know a lot more about it than you do about British history.


The way the British treated their colonies, dominions etc
is well demonstrated by the continuing existence of the
Commonwealth of Nations which has recently even accepted
one former non-British territory. There are over 50
members IRC.
Those are the weak and/or lazy ones who lacked what it took to put the
British raping to an end in a timely fashion.

And they loved being 'raped' so much that they joined a mutual club to celebrate
it. Yes, that makes sense. Maybe Mozambique was hoping they'd get raped too if
they joined, even though they'd never been a British colony ?

Graham
....
Reg:
All right, Stan. Don't labour the point. And what have they ever
given us in return?
Xerxes: The aqueduct.
Reg: Oh yeah, yeah they gave us that. Yeah. That's true.
Masked Activist:
And the sanitation!
Stan:
Oh yes... sanitation, Reg, you remember what the city used to be like.
Reg:
All right, I'll grant you that the aqueduct and the sanitation are
two things that the Romans have done...
Matthias:
And the roads...


http://www.epicure.demon.co.uk/whattheromans.html

--
Les Cargill
 
Arny Krueger wrote:
"keithr" <keithr@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ac04f7$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au
"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:n6adnUTeE-fObjbVnZ2dnUVZ_qfinZ2d@comcast.com...
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:48AB3363.A1D24B5B@hotmail.com

Name ONE country we 'raped'.

Three...

What is now known as The United States Of America

Nope, and in any case the British only ever had
possession of a small part of what is now called The
United States Of America.

You're avoiding the obvious point - the reason for our Revolutionary War was
was that the British were raping us.
That is patently and very simply untrue. That is the five cent story.
The real story is *A WHOLE LOT* more complex than that.

It is as much about communications being simply impossible and the
choice of words on official documents being unfortunate. My
five center is that King George said "you don't want to be traitors,
do you", which the Founding Fathers interpreted as "you are
traitors". The HBO "John Adams" series does a reasonable job of
this, but not too great.

It is also about the fact that the Colonies were a financial drain,
something that could not be clearly understood for decades or centuries.
"Wealth of Nations" was only published in 1776, and its implications
are still being debated.

It think the great innovation of the Revolution was the denial of
absolute political power to a divine right monarch, but that
wasn't even that new. But we go back and forth - the grass is always
greener - once "imperial" Presidencies show weakness, we go
the other way.

The British continued rape us, and we
had the war of 1812.
Wrong.

The British continued to rape us and helped precipitate
our war between the states.
Very, very wrong. At best, British involvement was limited to
refusing support for the South, which thwarted the only
straight Jefferson Davis could have drawn to.

Indeed, the British economy suffered greatly because of the
cotton boycott - the principal industry of the time was
textiles, and new sources were painful to develop. This
probably spurred growth of the Empire.

But Karl Marx himself helped found and carry the cotton
boycott. He showed the British that a country that had
outlawed slavery could not in good conscience support a
slave regime.


India

Yes but the original rulers were doing an effective job
long before

Thanks for agreeing that the British raped India.
Not even Ghandi phrased it in those terms.

South Africa

Not really,

Yes, really.
The "rapist" in SA was Cecil Rhodes, who was enough a pirate
that I'm not 100% sure any country would claim him. British
involvement in SA was not very colonial, and was limited
to a shipping outpost prior to wars with the Dutch - wars
which were not that much about SA.... it was an accidental
colony.

they did a much better job in other parts of Africa.

That too, but I thought that all I had to do is list one. My list of 3
stands without effective criticism.

...immediately come to mind.

History and geography are not really strong subjects in
America are they?

Indict yourself if you wish, since you either basically agreed with me, or
made a irrelevant argument. I could say the same thing based on the
statement by the British citizen who claimed that the British have never
ever raped not even one country.
There is no way to discuss this without *REAMS* of detail. The
short story just doesn't cut it.

One of the problems with people who live in second-rate countries like the
UK is that they don't appreciate the complexities of life in the rather
large and complex country that is still *The* world power.
This is just ridiculous, Arny. Stop it. You are embarrassing yourself.

It is composed of
50 states, many of which are each larger in terms of geographic size,
economic power, complex political and social life, and population than just
about any of the other countries of the world. Just keeping track of *that*
is more than enough for most ordinary mortals.
--
Les Cargill
 
Eeyore wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrot

Name ONE country we 'raped'.
Three...

What is now known as The United States Of America

Raped ? In what way ? Might I draw your attention to how you treated
your own indigenous population ?
I see. Who was William the Ba^H^H Conquerror? :) (I kid, Grahama).

That's largely irrelevant to the point at hand. And the
indigenous population wanted to use the... "white-eyes"
as a strategic ally against other indigenous populations.

They chose poorly.

There's venality and error enough for everybody involved. If
you dig deep enough into even Jackson's story, you find
that the Cherokee had internecine conflict that enabled
that significantly.

The Western plains tribes were more unfortunate, but
such was the understanding of people at the time. Without
Manifest Destiny, there would have been no America. The
railroads were critical.


India

Oh, that assortment of moghul territories and mini kingdoms we turned
into a nation state and introduced democracy to. We built the Indian
Parliament around 1912 or so IIRC. Yup, that was rape for sure
So what was that Ghandi guy so upset about? :)

South Africa

Cite ? I think you'll find the Boers were the beastly ones.
The Boers were stranded/isolated, mainly by the bankruptcy of the
Dutch East India Company.

--
Les Cargill
 
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 07:45:19 -0400, Les Cargill wrote:

That is patently and very simply untrue. That is the five cent story.
The real story is *A WHOLE LOT* more complex than that.
Correct, it was really a power grab by the wealthy of the colony and they
succeeded.
 
liquidator wrote:
"keithr" <keithr@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ac8ecf$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:L9ydndXzsbWN5jHVnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:48AC3648.31740115@hotmail.com

What is now known as The United States Of America
Raped ? In what way ?
"no taxation without representation".
That is an interesting one, I lived in the USA for nearly 6 years first on
a
working visa then as a permanent resident with a green card. I had no
right
to vote even for the local selectmen, therefore I had no representation,
didn't stop both the state and federal governments from taxing me though.

True, but a substatially different situation.

Frankly, all that info was readily available before you came to the US. By
remaining in the US you agree to obey US laws. That is a contact on your
part.

The colonists on the other hand made no such contract.

As far as paying taxes, you were recieving services, if nothing else roads
to drive on.
I wouldn't have any interest in giving even permanent residents the right
to vote. Shit, at least you CAN own property her. Many countries I have been
I can't even own proerty there.

Really, if I were agitating for change here, it would be breaking up the
media monopolies. The media has enough power to make or break laws and
politicians. That scares me more than anything.
That won't change anything. If you dig deep enough into how
media gets financed, the big conglomerates are probably
the only way it'll work.

Media does not have an educational nor *really* a public-goods
charter. Unless you want to see BBC style gummint organs
of media (which is not a bad model at all), you'll get what
you get.

At least the cablers provide CSPAN.

--
Les Cargill
 
Eeyore wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

keithr wrote:
I have to go to the US again in October, not something that I look forward
to, waiting probably 45 minutes in line to be faced with the most
unfriendly, unhelpful immigration officials that I have ever had the
misfortune to encounter (and that includes having visited such places as
communist China in the old days) being fingerprinted and photographed for
the umpteenth time. The US is the only country that I have visited that
finds it necessary to arm their immigration officials, I am not sure what
they are scared of.
The wait wouldn't be that long if they didn't keep finding enough
illegal crap, to justify their operating budget. Also, if you don't
like the way we do things, you are free to stay home.

America! Love it, or stay home.

I think increasingly people will stay home. I'll bet Florida's economy would
have been crippled had it not been for the falling dollar.

Graham
Florida is nothing but a military outpost with pretensions to
real estate speculation. Has been since Osceola and Al
Capone, respectively. Tourism is recent, and limited
to certain regions which have developed a really nasty
crime problem recently...

It also serves as a mythic Shangri La for people from New York City,
at least since "Midnight Cowboy". They buy beach condos and then
don't live in them.

The Brevard County seat is Titusville. The first
telephone line in a county building was in the courthouse in Titusville
around 1950. It was not named after Titus Andronicus, but it should have
been... the point being, there was nobody here.

But the weather is awesome.

I am referring to the "lower Alabama" portions of Florida, not Miami,
which is an ostensibly South American outpost that nobody really
understands.

--
Les Cargill
 
terryc wrote:
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 07:45:19 -0400, Les Cargill wrote:

That is patently and very simply untrue. That is the five cent story.
The real story is *A WHOLE LOT* more complex than that.

Correct, it was really a power grab by the wealthy of the colony and they
succeeded.
These were not unprincipled people, and trying to make a novel out of it
simply won't work. Who was a "good guy"/"bad guy" depends on too much
detail to bother.

The Founders were a lot broke-arse land speculators, the British
proper snubbed them socially and mistakes were made.

But the bottom line is that communications were impossible, and
things get worse when that is true.

--
Les Cargill
 
"Iain Churches" <IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:VDbrk.53345$_03.3426@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
"Joe Kotroczo" <kotroczo@mac.com> wrote in message
news:C4D3114B.601CB%kotroczo@mac.com...
On 21/08/08 12:26, in article
Epbrk.53344$_03.52557@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi, "Iain Churches"
IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote:



"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48AD3C89.4270FBAD@hotmail.com...


Soundhaspriority wrote:

keithr@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message 48accf3f@dnews.tpgi.com.au
The US is the only country that I have visited that
finds it necessary to arm their immigration officials, I am not sure
what
they are scared of.

PEOPLE LIKE YOU!

http://robertmorein.blogspot.com/

It's the imposter not the real Bob. Ignore !


Is there some way, other than the content of the post,
to tell them apart?

The headers.

"Path:
uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!newspeer.monmouth.com!newspeer1.nac.net!border2.n
ntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx02.ia
d01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!post01.iad01!news.buzzardnews.com!not-fo
r-mail"

Tells us this was posted from buzzardnews.com.

The real one uses giganews.com:

"Path:
uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!nlpi057.nbdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!Xl.tags.giganews
.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local02.nntp.dca.gigane
ws.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail"



Hi Joe.
Where do I find these headers in Outlook Express?
Right click on the message and select "Prpoerties"

Outlook Express is a horrible news reader, I must get my Linux machine put
back together.

Keith
 
On 21/08/08 12:41, in article
VDbrk.53345$_03.3426@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi, "Iain Churches"
<IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote:

(...)
Hi Joe.
Where do I find these headers in Outlook Express?

Iain
No idea, sorry. Haven't used Windows since NT 4.0.


--
Joe Kotroczo kotroczo@mac.com
 
"keithr" <keithr@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ad61ff@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
"Iain Churches" <IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:VDbrk.53345$_03.3426@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...


"Joe Kotroczo" <kotroczo@mac.com> wrote in message
news:C4D3114B.601CB%kotroczo@mac.com...
On 21/08/08 12:26, in article
Epbrk.53344$_03.52557@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi, "Iain Churches"
IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote:



"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48AD3C89.4270FBAD@hotmail.com...


Soundhaspriority wrote:

keithr@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message 48accf3f@dnews.tpgi.com.au
The US is the only country that I have visited that
finds it necessary to arm their immigration officials, I am not sure
what
they are scared of.

PEOPLE LIKE YOU!

http://robertmorein.blogspot.com/

It's the imposter not the real Bob. Ignore !


Is there some way, other than the content of the post,
to tell them apart?

The headers.

"Path:
uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!newspeer.monmouth.com!newspeer1.nac.net!border2.n
ntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nx02.ia
d01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!post01.iad01!news.buzzardnews.com!not-fo
r-mail"

Tells us this was posted from buzzardnews.com.

The real one uses giganews.com:

"Path:
uni-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!nlpi057.nbdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!Xl.tags.giganews
.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local02.nntp.dca.gigane
ws.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail"



Hi Joe.
Where do I find these headers in Outlook Express?

Right click on the message and select "Prpoerties"

Outlook Express is a horrible news reader, I must get my Linux machine put
back together.
Got it! Interesting. Thanks.

Iain
 
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:48AC7FDC.A8CAE620@hotmail.com

Arny Krueger wrote:

I note that those *lovely places* called "Concentration
Camps" were invented by the British during their attempt
to suppress personal liberties in South Africa. Talk
about covering yourself with glory in the pages of
history!

Fundmanentally(sic) no different to the camps you put your
Japanese citizens in during WW2.
Well yes, they were both composed of buildings. While the US accommodations
were spartan, the survival rate was very, very high. The US paid tens of
millions in compensation, and issued formal apologies.

Note that Canada interned tens of thousands of Japanese at the same time.
Thus, the British Commonwealth is in no position to point an accusing
finger.

Except I don't think we confiscated their property too.
True, Kitchener's "Scorched Earth" policy was about total destruction, not
confiscation.

There was a very high death rate in the British concentration camps due to
disease and malnutrition.The disposition of the property of the thousands of
dead hardly mattered to them.

Interesting what the allegedly superior British educational system does not
teach...
 
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:48AC825C.3AB48F7D@hotmail.com
Arny Krueger wrote:

Just ask anybody of Dutch descent about their *pleasure*
with the British military adventures in South Africa at
their expense.

The main 'second' Boer War was started by the Boers (the
Dutch) and they eventually lost.

"First, the Boers mounted pre-emptive strikes into
British-held territory in Natal and the Cape Colony,
besieging the British garrisons of Ladysmith, Mafeking
and Kimberley"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War

I don't know anyone of Dutch descent living here who
holds anti-British views. They're generally very friendly.
Would you expect Dutch with anti-British sentiments to:

(1) Emigrate to the UK?

(2) Voice their opinions to a citizen of the UK?

Nahh, the Dutch with anti-British sentiments came to places where they knew
they would find people with like experiences and sentiments. IOW, the US.
;-)

Note the congenital disrespect of the US from countries that we saved from
total destruction at least twice: UK & France.

Our first *mistake* was rising above them, and our second *mistake* was
staying there. ;-)
 
"keithr" <keithr@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ac9698$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au
"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:OJidnWyk244x5jHVnZ2dnUVZ_hWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Iain Churches" <IainNG@kolumbus.fi> wrote in message
news:IP_qk.53199$_03.43684@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:48AC3778.6B793F59@hotmail.com...



I'd love to see an American history book. They must get
these ideas from somewhere.

The Scandinavian nations in general seem to hold the US
in rather low esteem.

It is known as "Ankle Biting".

There are often comparisons in the
Swedish press of American and Scandinavian educational
systems, social policies, salary levels, political
structure, etc etc.

More ankle biting.
Obviously, they have feelings of inferiority or why else would they be
trying to re-balance the books?

Most of the smarter, more industrious Scandinavians
emigrated to the US decades ago. Who cares what those
laggards that are left behind think?

Ah that great american combination of arrogance and
ignorance.
Prove it.
 
"Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:48ad5521$0$28414$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com
Arny Krueger wrote:

You're avoiding the obvious point - the reason for our
Revolutionary War was was that the British were raping
us.

That is patently and very simply untrue.
So much for all the literature of the day that basically said exactly that.

That is the five cent story. The real story is *A WHOLE LOT* more complex
than that.
Reality is always complex. I was responding to a two cent falsehood with a
five cent answer.

It is as much about communications being simply
impossible and the choice of words on official documents
being unfortunate.
Nice job of dismissing available documentation that seems to disagree with
your narrow view.

My five center is that King George said "you don't want to be traitors,
do you", which the Founding Fathers interpreted as "you are traitors".
In the context, probably pretty reasonable.

The HBO "John Adams" series does a reasonable
job of this, but not too great.
Ah, truth by means of HBO. ;-)

It is also about the fact that the Colonies were a
financial drain, something that could not be clearly
understood for decades or centuries. "Wealth of Nations"
was only published in 1776, and its implications are
still being debated.
You're trying to obfuscate by means of raising issues that you admit still
aren't resolved.

If you want to respond properly, you'll present a relevant, concise
counter-argument.
 
"keithr" <keithr@nowhere.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ac8ecf$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au
"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:L9ydndXzsbWN5jHVnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:48AC3648.31740115@hotmail.com

What is now known as The United States Of America

Raped ? In what way ?

"no taxation without representation".

That is an interesting one, I lived in the USA for nearly
6 years first on a working visa then as a permanent
resident with a green card. I had no right to vote even
for the local selectmen, therefore I had no
representation, didn't stop both the state and federal
governments from taxing me though.
I note that voting in the UK and most other countries is also restricted to
citizens, so you are whining about a policy that is in fact accepted
reality.

The taxes you paid were substantially the ones in force when you got your
visa. You were offered a deal, you took it, and now you apparently wish to
whine about it.

Not my problem. I guess you should have stayed home. ;-)
 
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Also, if you don't like the way we do things, you are free to stay
home.

Actually, I am not, I don't go there for pleasure, I go there to work

that's no excuse. if you don't like it, you can find a different
job.
How's the dollar Michael?

Kind regards

Peter Larsen
 
"Peter Larsen" <digilyd@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48ad6ca1$0$56775$edfadb0f@dtext02.news.tele.dk
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Also, if you don't like the way we do things, you are
free to stay home.

Actually, I am not, I don't go there for pleasure, I go
there to work

that's no excuse. if you don't like it, you can find
a different job.

How's the dollar Michael?
Improving.

Doesn't matter what the dollar is worth if you've got enough of them to live
well. Almost all US inhabitants do. The rest need to either get a job or at
least apply for welfare. ;-)

Remember that in the US we are whining about paying 1/3 to 1/4 as much for
gasoline as most of the rest of the world.

The dollar is still the official legal tender in many countries other than
the US. And defacto legal tender in many more.
 
"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:fvadnecwk_fo8DDVnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@comcast.com...

Doesn't matter what the dollar is worth if you've got enough of them to
live well.
A dunce in three subjects in one thread:
History, geography and now economics.

Come on Arny, tell us more:)

Iain
 
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Les Cargill" <lcargill@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:48ad5521$0$28414$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com
Arny Krueger wrote:

You're avoiding the obvious point - the reason for our
Revolutionary War was was that the British were raping
us.

That is patently and very simply untrue.

So much for all the literature of the day that basically said exactly that.
The literature is what's know as "agitprop". It's a part of the
story. Your statement can easily be untrue without being
false - it is a partial truth.

That is the five cent story. The real story is *A WHOLE LOT* more complex
than that.

Reality is always complex. I was responding to a two cent falsehood with a
five cent answer.

It is as much about communications being simply
impossible and the choice of words on official documents
being unfortunate.

Nice job of dismissing available documentation that seems to disagree with
your narrow view.
I find no definition of the word "dismiss" that means "places as a
smaller element when in context."

My five center is that King George said "you don't want to be traitors,
do you", which the Founding Fathers interpreted as "you are traitors".

In the context, probably pretty reasonable.
Probably.

The HBO "John Adams" series does a reasonable
job of this, but not too great.

Ah, truth by means of HBO. ;-)
No, offering a realatively well-wrought survey item of media as
a recommendation. I really don't like the book it's based on
all that much - the movie's better in this case.

It is also about the fact that the Colonies were a
financial drain, something that could not be clearly
understood for decades or centuries. "Wealth of Nations"
was only published in 1776, and its implications are
still being debated.

You're trying to obfuscate by means of raising issues that you admit still
aren't resolved.
These are not obfuscations - these are elements of the
story. The colonies were a drain on the Crown treasury, for reasons
not well understood for a century. That is why the taxes were levied.
The colonists, not being so-much colonizers, didn't want to pay for it
either.

If you want to respond properly, you'll present a relevant, concise
counter-argument.
You'll find very few better, Arny. This is about as "concise" as it gets.

--
Les Cargill
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top