/Earthquake: Coincidence or a Corporate Oil Tragedy?/

Hello! send this letter to 1000 newspapers, radios use www.infacta.com /Earthquake: Coincidence or a Corporate Oil Tragedy?/ <http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/123104Limburg/123104limburg.html> By: Andrew Limburg Independent Me

Apparently one can spell "Snake Oil" in Capital Letters, too (Re: CRYPTO-GRAM, August 15, 2004)

At 11:26 PM -0500 8/14/04, Bruce Schneier wrote: >From: "Ken Lavender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: ICS Atlanta > >I am APPAULED at your "comments" that you had made on your website: > > > >You have statements are nothing but slander & defama

Re: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

Ken wrote: >Crazy authoritarianism. Rules for the sake of rules. They exist to >show who is boss. Like school uniforms or corporate dress codes - >the rule is made not to enforce any desirable behaviour but to >show who is where in the the hierarchy, who is able to make rules >and who has to o

Re: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 05:10:12PM -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote: > The "parking lot" (read: makeout spot/planespotter parking, etc.) abut a > half mile from the end of the main runways at Lambert are now permanently > closed, and trying to pull over is an open invite for immediate attention. A simi

Re: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

"Tyler Durden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >*: A year or two ago someone posted about the blow up of Texas City back in >the early 1950s. 1947. >Apparently, some kind of tanker hit something else and set of a chain >reaction killing thousands and wiping out the town After several earlier event

Re: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

Justin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >HOUSTON (Reuters) - Law enforcement officials said on Monday they are looking >for a man seen taking pictures of two refineries in Texas City, Texas. At Usenix Security a few years back, we [a bunch of random security people, most of whom were foreign nationals

Re: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

>The person in question was just somebody with a weakness for industrial >architecture. The "no cameras" signs were very popular in east block countries. It was forbidden to take pictures of bridges, government buildings, airports, railway stations, industrial installations, water dams etc. The

RE: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Trei, Peter wrote: > I wonder if even over there people who park themselves near > airports railway statiions, obsessively noting the arrival > and departure of each vehicle, attract the attention of > security? Yes, at least here in St. Louis, Missouri, backwater of the Lat

RE: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Trei, Peter wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Thomas Shaddack > > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 3:48 PM > > To: Justin > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >

RE: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Thomas Shaddack > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 3:48 PM > To: Justin > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda > > > >

Re: Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

On 2004-07-20T21:47:31+0200, Thomas Shaddack wrote: > > The person in question was just somebody with a weakness for industrial > architecture. You're missing the big picture: A light-skinned person with dark hair, a camera, a white van and an oil refinery, all in Shrub's h

Texas oil refineries, a White Van, and Al Qaeda

about 30 miles south of Houston, has three refineries including the largest U.S. plant operated by BP Plc., which is the third-largest U.S. refinery, processing 470,000 barrels of crude oil per day. The man, described as white with dark hair, was seen taking pictures outside the refineries, all

Bonny Light Crude Oil Procurement / Lifting from Nigeria

Dear Sir, BROKERAGE / CONSULTANCY SERVICES FOR PROCUREMENT / LIFTING OF BONNY LIGHT CRUDE OIL FROM NIGERIA. Our company, MICGBELI INTERNATIONAL, an export/ import products marketing and consultancy outfit is in position to consult for you in the areas of crude oil procurement and lifting from

Re: Snake oil?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > http://www.topsecretcrypto.com/ > Snake oil? I am not entirely sure. on the plus side - it apparently uses Sha-1 for a signing algo, RSA with a max keysize of 16Kbits (overkill, but better than enforcing something stupidly small), built in NTP synch for time

Snake oil?

http://www.topsecretcrypto.com/ Snake oil? Regards, Matt-

oil

WAJMA POPAL COMPANY IMPORT- EXPORT [EMAIL PROTECTED] 28.11.2003 year FROM: MR. MUKHAMAD SHAFIK POPAL GENERAL DIRECTOR "WAJMA POPAL COMPANY" Our company intends to purchase Bonny Light Crude Oil. Oil should be: 1) the terms of shall delivery be shall be F.O.B. 2) t

CRUDE OIL ALLOCATIONS

OFFER CRUDE OIL ALLOCATIONS AVAILABLE bonny light crude oil Dear sir Acting on behalf of the principle seller,I do issue this pro-formal offer for the

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

Rich Salz wrote: Perhaps a few "best practices" papers are in order. They might help the secure (distributed) computing field a great deal. /r$ -- The new book, Practical Cryptography, by Niels Ferguson and Bruce Schneier is useful. regards, Frederick

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

I thought the 3G (UMTS) cellphones at least were going to use reasonably good crypto; don't know about the overall security architecture though. Jaap-Henk On Fri, 06 Jun 2003 14:30:04 -0400 Ian Grigg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > John Kelsey wrote: > >> So, what can I do about it, as an individu

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

James A. Donald wrote: > Could you point me somewhere that illustates server issued > certs, certification with zero administrator overhead and small > end user overhead? Been a while since I played with it, but IIRC OpenCA (www.openca.org) is a full implimentation of a CA, in perl cgi, with no adm

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

my site has one. ca0.net ..tom > -- > On 7 Jun 2003 at 19:05, Dave Howe wrote: > > issuing certs to someone is trivial from both a server and a > > user endpoint - the user just gets a "click here to request > > your key" and hits ok on a few dialog boxes; the server > > simply hosts some pr

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

-- On 7 Jun 2003 at 19:05, Dave Howe wrote: > issuing certs to someone is trivial from both a server and a > user endpoint - the user just gets a "click here to request > your key" and hits ok on a few dialog boxes; the server > simply hosts some pretty off-the-shelf cgi. >[...] > its surpri

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

Anonymous Sender wrote: > James A. Donald writes: > E-Gold could set things up to allow its customers to authenticate with > certs issued by Verisign, or with considerably more work it could even > issue certs itself that could be used for customer authentication. > Why doesn't it do so? Well, it'

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >Actually, the ASN.1 part is a major factor in the X.509 interoperability >problems. Different cert vendors include different extensions, or different >encodings. They put different information into different parts of the >certificate (or indeed the same

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

James A. Donald writes: > Suppose the e-gold, to prevent this sea of spam trying to get > people to login to fake e-gold sites, wanted people to use > public keys instead of shared secrets, making your secret key > the instrument that controls the account instead of your shared > password. > >

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

Ian Grigg wrote: >(Similar to GSM's. That is hard to attack, >there is AFAIR no 'trival' attack, [...] Just wait a little while. By the way, one can already buy fake base stations that mount man-in-the-middle attacks on GSM as a way to eavesdrop on GSM calls. It's off the shelf, but it costs r

Re: CDR: Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

On Fri, 06 Jun 2003, James A. Donald wrote: > Suppose the e-gold, to prevent this sea of spam trying to get > people to login to fake e-gold sites, wanted people to use > public keys instead of shared secrets, making your secret key > the instrument that controls the account instead of your shared

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

-- James A. Donald: > > Certificate caching is not the problem that needs solving. > > The problem is all this spam attempting to fool people into > > logging in to fake BofA websites and fake e-gold websites, > > to steal their passwords or credit card numbers On 6 Jun 2003 at 15:04, Tim Dier

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

At 04:24 PM 6/6/2003 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: >I don't think so. ??? public key registered in place of shared-secret? NACHA debit trials using digitally signed transactions did it with both software keys as well as hardware tokens. http://internetcouncil.nacha.org/News/news.html in the abo

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 06:08:34PM -0400, Ian Grigg wrote: > Derik asks the pertinant question: > > The question is: how do we convince M$ and Netscape to include something > > else in their software? If it's not supported in IE, then it wont be > > available to the vast majority of users out the

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

-- On 4 Jun 2003 at 20:58, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > it is relatively trivial to demonstrate that public keys can > be registered in every business process that currently > registers shared- secrets (pins, passwords, radius, kerberos, > etc, etc) I don't think so. Suppose the e-gold, to pr

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

Derik asks the pertinant question: > The question is: how do we convince M$ and Netscape to include something > else in their software? If it's not supported in IE, then it wont be > available to the vast majority of users out there. My view, again, IMHO: ignore Microsoft. Concentrate on the o

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Gutmann) writes: > Bodo Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >Using an explicit state machine helps to get code suitable for multiplexing > >within a single thread various connections using non-blocking I/O. > > Is there some specific advantage here, or is it an acade

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

At 04:42 PM 6/4/2003 -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote: >Nonsense. One can simply cache the certificate, exactly as >one does with SSH. In fact, Mozilla at least does exactly >this if you tell it to. The reason that this is uncommon >is because the environments where HTTPS is used >are generally spontaneo

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

At 10:09 PM 6/4/2003, James A. Donald wrote: Eric Rescorla > Nonsense. One can simply cache the certificate, exactly as > one does with SSH. In fact, Mozilla at least does exactly > this if you tell it to. The reason that this is uncommon is > because the environments where HTTPS is used are genera

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

John Kelsey wrote: > So, what can I do about it, as an individual? Make the cellphone companies > build good crypto into their systems? Any ideas how to do that? Nope. Cellphone companies are big slow moving targets. They get their franchise from the government. If the NSA wants weak crypto,

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

Eric Rescorla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This isn't really true in the SSL case: > To a first order, everyone ignores any extensions (except sometimes > the constraints) and uses the CN for the DNS name of the server. Except some CAs make certs that can only work as an SSL server and not an SS

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Eric Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Too often people see something like Peter's statement above and say > > "oh, it's that nasty ASN.1 in X.509 that is the problem, so we'll just > > do it in XML instead and then it'll work fine" which is simpl

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

Eric Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Too often people see something like Peter's statement above and say > "oh, it's that nasty ASN.1 in X.509 that is the problem, so we'll just > do it in XML instead and then it'll work fine" which is simply not true. > The formatting of the certificates is

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

At 03:50 PM 6/3/03 -0700, Eric Blossom wrote: ... GSM and CDMA phones come with the crypto enabled. The crypto's good enough to keep out your neighbor (unless he's one of us) but if you're that paranoid, you should opt for the end-to-end solution. The CDMA stuff (IS-95) is pretty broken: *linear*

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

mm, SIGINT, cellphone, microwave, fiber-optic, so that snake oil is apt protection. If all telecomm was shut down no more would change than pulling the plug on television. The other 2% is what the billions and billions is trying to find among the EM cataract of plaintext and speak smoke and whine --

[eb@comsec.com: Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down]

hery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich Salz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, cypherpunks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i On Tue, J

[eay@pobox.com: Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down]

g-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: EKR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Eric Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Guthery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich Salz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, cypherpunks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: M

[eb@comsec.com: Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down]

hery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rich Salz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, cypherpunks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i On Tue, J

Re: CDR: Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

Sampo Syreeni wrote: >Rather it's the fact that the Big >Brother doesn't have the necessary total funds, and so doesn't listen into >a considerable proportion of calls as a whole. Yet. As far as we know. :-) I agree it's an economic issue, and law enforcement doesn't seem to listen in on a con

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

On Monday, June 2, 2003, at 07:09 AM, Ian Grigg wrote: PGP was also mildly successful, and was done by one guy, PRZ. The vision was very clear. All others had to do was to fix the bugs... Sadly, free versions never quite made the jump into GUI mail clients, so widespread success was denied to

Re: Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down

At 08:32 PM 5/31/03 -0400, Scott Guthery wrote: >Hello, Rich ... > >When I drill down on the many pontifications made by computer >security and cryptography experts all I find is given wisdom. Maybe >the reason that folks roll their own is because as far as they can see >that's what everyone does.

Re: Operation Iraqi Liberation = OIL

>>> If my neighbor wishes to contribute to the Ruwandans or the Iraqi >>> Liberation Front, he is welcome to. >> >> Operation Iraqi Liberation has a better acronym. >> > >Good one! I'm surprised "OIL" has not been picked-up on by the pr

Oil on your French Toast: The 50 year oil war: No shock, a bit of awe

program to "nationalize" French Indo-China, which is now the independent country of Vietnam. Thus General Giap of 'Nam war fame got his weapons from the US, to drive out the French and later the US. But it was all very carefully planned. The result was that the French lost

S.T.O.P. State Terrorists and Oil stealing Perps.

Some FoxNews whacko just called Saddam "a subterranean rat scuttling through underground tunnels in Baghdad." Maybe it's just late, but I found that to be hysterically funny. MEMO TO FOX: I know it's a novel concept, but how about not overdoing it? BORDEAUX, France - Vandals in this southwest Bord

Latest Threat to the Flow of Oil

1. The Economic Consequences of the War 2. Latest Threat to the Flow of Oil 3. The Economy Continues to Crumble Could Iraq war sink American economy? The U.S. economy is in a fragile state, and the timing of the Bush administration's preemptive Gulf war couldn't be worse, some econ

All your oil are belong to US.

Your Oil Are Belong To Us! posted by sTaRe : 6:37 AM : Permanent archive link to this story http://www.incunabula.org/blog/archive/2003_03_21_index.html#200021384

Fascist IMF Castor Oil.

An International Monetary Fund report acknowledged that opening capital markets to foreign investment may raise the risk of financial crises in poor nations, casting doubt on advice the IMF has offered governments for more than a decade. Investment from overseas might increase volatility in dev

Mmmmmm, oil money! Tasty!

That's, quite a maybe there... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81480,00.html Iraqi Oil Money May Be Used for Humanitarian Relief ^^ Wednesday, March 19, 2003 UNITED NATIONS . The United States and Britain are working on a plan to use Iraqi oil proceeds from

Bloody Oil since 1989.

grain trade with American farmers, cooperation with U.S. intelligence agencies, oil sales to American refiners that helped finance its military, and muted White House criticism of its human rights and war atrocities," the Daily News story said. Armitage admitted in 1990 that the Reagan and

New Oil Order.

(longish.) The New Oil Order Michael Renner, February 20, 2003 Only in the most direct sense is the Bush administration's Iraq policy directed against Saddam Hussein. In contrast to all the loud talk about terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, and human rights violations, very litt

Re: Blood for Oil (was The Pig Boy was really squealing today

> So the US killed a lot of people there, so as to > spread respect for freedom and democracy, and installed another > dictator without elections, or any plan for elections The current leader was elected, not in accordance with western democratic norms that some people want to impose of Afghans

Re: Blood for Oil (was The Pig Boy was really squealing today

at Thursday, February 20, 2003 1:28 AM, Harmon Seaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was seen to say: > No oil but lots of dope, especially lots of high grade opium and > the CIA and the US scum military has been just desperate to get > control of the world heroin trade again like they

Re: Blood for Oil (was The Pig Boy was really squealing today

ere has already formulated their own opinion on > > Iraq some time ago - but we're not going on & on & on about it. > > Remember when our whole 'real' reason for going into Afghanistan was > > all about oil too? Look how much we're getting from th

Re: Blood for Oil (was The Pig Boy was really squealing today

on. We got it. > > > He's just trying to convince us that he's *really* serious about it. > Hey Chaka: everybody here has already formulated their own opinion on > Iraq some time ago - but we're not going on & on & on about it. > Remember when our whole '

Snake Oil That Will Not Die

Oh look, it's a brand new fluff piece on Meganet and their Virtual Matrix Encryption, deconstructed years ago in various forums, including this one. http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/dir.1998.01.01-1998.01.07/msg00047.html Why on earth is the Department of Labor giving them money? Meganet now

Re: heat-oil 7096Wivn8-5-10

do you think the price of heating oil will go higher into the winter

In Oil we trust.

US. Promises to Hold Iraqi Oil 'In Trust' Wed Jan 22,12:34 PM ET WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Secretary of State Colin Powell promised that a U.S. military occupation would hold Iraq's oilfields "in trust" for the Iraqi people. In an interview with U.S. newspapers on Tuesd

Boarding an oil tanker

Spanish journalists and Greenpeace activists have been detained by police from Gibraltar, after boarding an oil tanker off the Mediterranean island. Two activists raised a banner on a mast at the front of the oil tanker, with the words: Danger Oil! According to Spanish press reports, after

GLOBAL OIL.

Protestors Turn Focus Towards Oil Peace and environmental activists are increasingly taking oil companies to task for their role in fomenting war and causing pollution. On Monday, December 3, a dramatic protest was held at the London offices of so-called environmental consultants [ 1

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

--- begin forwarded text Status: RO To: "R. A. Hettinga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Somebody Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 16:58:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne FWIW (Trivia) > It is said that Simon Kenton could rel

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

Kevin Elliott wrote: > 2) rifled muskets were not effective because of the ponderous reload > time (I don't have precise figures, but the number 1/6th-1/10th the > rate of fire of a smoothbore musket comes to mind) There isn't that much difference in reload times - say 30 seconds for a Kentucky r

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

> Tyler Durden[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > > "In school yard politics this edge is normally a weapon > of some sort that can equalize the playing field (guns usually in the US, > try going to an inner city public school for 2 years). Saddam sees this > and > that is what let him to deve

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

> "MD" == Mike Diehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MD> And the middle east is the only place we meddle? I think not. MD> But the middle east is the only place who has overtly attacked MD> us. A minor point about grammar and logic: places don't attack, overtly or covertly, neither

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote: > I just hope that Americans see this, and see that what they're > going to get from this behavior isn't world domination, but either > a genocide of half the planet, or a life in a bared wire world, > with no freedom left, in a vain attempt to protec

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Tyler Durden wrote: > "Well, they have enough non-central leadership to all be against Israel and > the US. And to have been at war against the Israelies since Bible times..." > > OK, Mike, this is a good example of the kind of "facts" that lead to fairly > easy (though erro

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Mike Diehl wrote: > Granted. I wish we could go back to isolationism, but as the worlds only > remaining Super Power, that seems unlikely. No matter what we do, we simply > can't win. Life isn't a football game, quite 'trying to win' and I think you'd find a lot of issues

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

ized now, or the CIA will lose a valuable source of covert action funding. From: Jim Choate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: Alif The Terrible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne Date: W

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who'sne

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Mike Diehl wrote: > And the middle east is the only place we meddle? I think not. But the > middle east is the only place who has overtly attacked us. Revisionist, and incorrect, history. Somalia isn't in the middle east. Britian isn't in the middle east. Mexico isn't in

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

"In school yard politics this edge is normally a weapon of some sort that can equalize the playing field (guns usually in the US, try going to an inner city public school for 2 years). Saddam sees this and that is what let him to develop those WMD, to equalize against a superior foe / bully" A

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Kevin Elliott wrote: > At 14:06 -0700 on 11/19/02, Mike Diehl wrote: > >> The british got VERY upset with us because of a tendency > >> to shoot officers which was considered very bad "form". I believe it > >> was common practice to hang anyone found armed with a rifle f

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. W ho's ne

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Kevin Elliott wrote: > My original point was about the more general topic of unit tactics > during the revolution. Disciplined formation fighting and volley > fire is THE way to win large scale musket engagements. Any other way > gets you clubbed to death by weight of fire

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Tyler Durden wrote: > >Granted. I wish we could go back to isolationism, but as the worlds >only > >remaining Super Power, that seems unlikely. No matter what we >do, we > >simply can't win. When faced with a game I can't win, I either >decide to > >not play, or I cheat. F

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

> Israeli tanks aren't the ONLY things that kill someone's > kids. The whole > region has been at war for 100's of years. If Israel backed You do realize that the whole world has been at war for hundreds of years, do you ? Israel is now the bully in the region, and is conforted in keeping thi

The Marc Rich oil slick.

Marc Rich Linked to Criminal Oil Spill. (english) profrv@(nospam)fuckmicrosoft.com 6:07pm Tue Nov 19 '02 article#218082 http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=218082&group=webcast Fresh motive,as if any were needed, for the assassination by public subscription of WJ.Clinton. &q

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

PROTECTED]> To: Jim Dixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 15:37:38 -0700 On Tuesday 19 November 2002 03:30 pm, Jim Dix

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

> Mike Diehl[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote > [Mike wrote: No, I think the Muslims need to back down, or be forced to. ] "[Muslims] Have been at war against the Israelies [sic] since Bible times"?? Mike, I hate to break it to you, but Muslims did not exist before 612 AD, when Mohammed receiv

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

hat is not often appreciated here in the US is that the Ashkenazi, > European-descent Jewish folks 1) Don't look semitic 2) Come from > Europe 3) Come armed and money-ed by their friends the US, who by wild > coincident need LOTS and LOTS of oil for their giant, gas-gu

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Tyler Durden wrote: > Let's have some history here. The "Muslims" have not been at war against the > "Israelites" since Biblical times. That is completely wrong. Hell, there > haven't been any "Israelites" for nearly two millenia. More to the point, there were no Muslims in

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

-- On 19 Nov 2002 at 15:45, Tyler Durden wrote: > Mikey: I would suggest tangling with Chomsky for a bit. Start > with... > > http://zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=11&ItemID=2 > 312 Chomsky is a liar. His citations are mostly fraudulent, and he has at one time or another defended

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

On Tuesday 19 November 2002 03:30 pm, Jim Dixon wrote: > More to the point, there were no Muslims in Biblical times. The > Muslims appeared around 600 years after Christ, centuries after the > beginning of the Jewish diaspora. The Romans drove the Jews out of > Jerusalem and

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

On Tuesday 19 November 2002 03:06 pm, Trei, Peter wrote: > > Mike Diehl[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote > You don't deny either of my surmises about your experience or lack > thereof. I didn't find them relevent. My understanding of the facts doesn't matter. I was LOOKING for the f

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

At 14:06 -0700 on 11/19/02, Mike Diehl wrote: The british got VERY upset with us because of a tendency to shoot officers which was considered very bad "form". I believe it was common practice to hang anyone found armed with a rifle for what amounted to war crimes. But again, very poor rate

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. W ho's ne

At 15:57 -0500 on 11/19/02, Trei, Peter wrote: Kevin Elliott[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Correction in the interest of historical accuracy. The idea that we succeeded in the revolutionary war by "inventing a new form of warfare". The reality is that the british were marching in formation for

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. W ho's ne

On Tuesday 19 November 2002 02:25 pm, Trei, Peter wrote: > > Mike Diehl[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > If I might ask, if they had suffered light casualties, why were they > > in retreat? > > They were exhausted and outnumbered (the redcoats > were a raiding party

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. W ho's ne

> Mike Diehl[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > On Tuesday 19 November 2002 01:57 pm, Trei, Peter wrote: > > > Kevin Elliott[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Correction in the interest of historical accuracy. The idea > that we > > > succeeded in the revolutionary war by "inventing a

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

the Ashkenazi, European-descent Jewish folks 1) Don't look semitic 2) Come from Europe 3) Come armed and money-ed by their friends the US, who by wild coincident need LOTS and LOTS of oil for their giant, gas-guzzling nation of suburbs and SUVs. The "war" between Muslims and Israel

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. W ho's ne

At 14:11 -0700 on 11/19/02, Mike Diehl wrote: On Tuesday 19 November 2002 01:57 pm, Trei, Peter wrote: > > Kevin Elliott[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Correction in the interest of historical accuracy. The idea that we > > succeeded in the revolutionary war by "inventing a new for

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

On Tuesday 19 November 2002 01:48 pm, Kevin Elliott wrote: > Well, there nuggets and the larger truth... Rifles were widely used > as sniper rifles by the Americans. They were commonly available > (though expensive) because they are a far superior hunting tool than > a smoothb

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. W ho's ne

On Tuesday 19 November 2002 01:57 pm, Trei, Peter wrote: > > Kevin Elliott[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Correction in the interest of historical accuracy. The idea that we > > succeeded in the revolutionary war by "inventing a new form of > > warfare". The reality is that the

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who 's ne

On Tuesday 19 November 2002 01:18 pm, Trei, Peter wrote: > If you think 'the Muslims' are your enemy, > then you have a problem. I never said that they were MY enemy. > 'The Muslims' > are not a monolithic group, and have no > central leadership. This is a bit lik

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

-- On 19 Nov 2002 at 12:02, Kevin Elliott wrote: > If you read between the lines of US history, you'll discover > that America did not begin to succeed in the war until late > in the war when the troops had become better trained and > disciplined. This is not my interpretation. Rather, the Am

RE: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. W ho's ne

> Kevin Elliott[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > At 10:37 -0700 on 11/19/02, Mike Diehl wrote: > >> Unfortunately, terrorism is probably a predictable response by people > >> who want to be able to control their own destinies, select their own > >> leaders and forms of goivernment and so on. >

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

At 13:14 -0700 on 11/19/02, Mike Diehl wrote: On Tuesday 19 November 2002 01:02 pm, Kevin Elliott wrote: > Correction in the interest of historical accuracy. The idea that we > succeeded in the revolutionary war by "inventing a new form of > warfare". The reality is that the bri

Re: OPPOSE THE WAR! We are going to ruin Iraq to get the oil. Who's ne

policy has never been for the benefit of the Afghan people. It's been a policy based so-called weopons of mass distruction, oil, economics, unfriendly leadership. Right or wrong, but let's be blunt. I don't think it's fair, but that IS how things go with humans. I don'

  1   2   >