FYI. Interesting, I thought. Am hyperlinked impaired. Here's the address: http://www.WorldNetDaily.com/

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), July 30, 1999

Answers

Yep. Posting "anonymous" here isn't. Guess I need to change my name. Anyway, this works by mapping your "anonymous" name to the server-based log files which shows the IP address & domain you posted from, and similar "tricks".

Truly anonymous services do exist, but the anonymity is still limited if the NSA or FBI gets involved.

-- Anonymous99 (Anonymous99@Anonymous99.xxx), July 30, 1999.

This is actually a Wired Article

Political News from Wired News

 Unmasking Anonymous Posters
 Oscar S. Cisneros

  3:00 a.m.  29.Jul.99.PDT

 A new legal trend has privacy advocates up in
 arms: Attorneys are using subpoenas to unmask
 the identities of anonymous posters to online
 discussion forums. And the people whose
 identities are at stake rarely have the chance to
 fight back.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), July 30, 1999.

And with all the talk about "hoarders", "doomsayers", "millenial Madness" and "Apocalyptic Christians", being set-up as scapegoats to take the fall....

...I'm outta here folks. The Brownshirts are marching......

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 30, 1999.

INVAR,

I hate to say it, but it's kind of late now, don't 'cha think?

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

Deb,

I Don't plan on giving the Gestapo any more reasons to decide "I'm Dangerous" to the state or community because I believe in self- reliance and freedom.

It's like giving your enemies more bullets to shoot you with.

Tootaloo.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 30, 1999.

Do you fear man, or God?

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

Humm.

Glad I'm... just me. I'll ask Phil Greenspun what his and the MIT policy is.

Diane

Unmasking Anonymous Posters
Oscar S. Cisneros
3:00 a.m. 29.Jul.99.PDT

http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/20983.html

[Fair Use: For Educational/Research Purposes Only]

A new legal trend has privacy advocates up in arms: Attorneys are using subpoenas to unmask the identities of anonymous posters to online discussion forums. And the people whose identities are at stake rarely have the chance to fight back.

Anonymous posters can seek to quash the subpoena and preserve their anonymity, said David Sobel, general counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

http://www.epic.org/

But first, they have to have notice that the subpoena has been served.

See also: Not-So-Privileged Info

http://www.wired.com/news/news/culture/story/20895.html

Without notice, "there's no one in the picture that's ready to challenge the subpoena and bring it before a judge," he said.

Since subpoenas in civil lawsuits typically do not require a judge's stamp of approval, Sobel is concerned that individuals and companies are filing bogus lawsuits just to peel back the veil on a user's alias.

"Anyone can file a lawsuit," Sobel said. "You get a lawyer. You file a lawsuit against John Doe. And suddenly you have the authority to issue a subpoena."

Under their terms of service, many forum operators and ISPs promise not to divulge their users' personal information unless requested by a subpoena or court proceeding, Sobel said. But not all forum operators provide notice when a subpoena has been served.

Although it's not written into their terms of service agreements, both America Online and Microsoft's MSN let users know about pending subpoenas, Sobel said. "At least the subscriber has a fighting chance. At least they know what's going on."

Other forum operators -- notably Yahoo -- don't provide user notice. That's raised the ire of privacy advocates like Sobel and prompted users to erect a discussion group...

http:// clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/johndoes

...about the topic in one of Yahoo's forums.

"When people start to get the awareness that Yahoo is doing nothing to protect their privacy, that's going to start affecting their traffic," Sobel said. Les French moderates a Yahoo discussion board for "Anonymous Yahoo message posters who are being sued." French started the forum after a former employer used a subpoena to reveal the identities behind his and other users' anonymous posts.

"They went down to court, filed a lawsuit, and subpoenaed Yahoo. They didn't send any notice to their users," French said.

"In my case, Yahoo provided them information which enabled [the company] to trace me back to Compuserve. And Compuserve, without notifying me, just turned over all the information in my account, including my credit card numbers. The only thing they didn't get was the password to my account."

Yahoo could not be reached for comment. But an attorney for the company who brought suit against French said that the company is well within its rights to unmask anonymous posters.

French and the other targets of the suit "essentially mixed fact with fiction" when describing the company online, said Stephan Pearson, assistant general counsel for Itex Corporation. ...

http://www.itex.com/

...Portland, Oregon-based Itex manages the records of bartering transactions between companies.

"We made the decision to unmask the identities of people who we thought were making defamatory statements about Itex Corporation," Pearson said.

French said that Itex has a different motivation: silencing criticism of the company's many business foibles. He said Itex has been beset by difficulties, including shifts in leadership, an ongoing Securities and Exchange Commission investigation, and being de-listed from the Nasdaq stock exchange for failing to file an annual report in 1998.

"I believe the reason Itex filed the suit was to chill speech -- free speech -- there on Yahoo's boards," French said, adding that financial discussion boards are one way to keep companies honest, and remind the board of directors that investors are watching their every action.

Pearson disagreed.

"Our action is a defamation-of-business kind of action and defamation has never been protected speech," he said. Some defendants named in the suit after they were unmasked were dropped from it when it was determined that their comments didn't harm the company in an illegal way, he added.

Regardless of the outcome of French and Itex's suit, privacy experts are worried the trend will only escalate without additional protections for consumers.

EPIC's Sobel drew into question not only Yahoo's practices, but TrustE's as well. TrustE...

http://www.truste.org/

...awards seals to Web pages and companies who adhere to their strict privacy policy standards.

How can TrustE grant Yahoo a privacy seal when the company coughs up personal information without providing notice of a subpoena to users, Sobel asked.

"It's not part of our program to require that they do put the user on notice of a subpoena," said Paola Benassi, TrustE spokeswoman. "If it becomes an issue, we'll definitely see what makes the most sense."

Benassi defended Yahoo's privacy policy because she said it gives users notice that their information will be given out when Yahoo is served with a subpoena. She speculated that one cause for the lack of subpoena notice may be the volume of subpoenas, and the fact that many users are likely to set up accounts with false information.

Privacy advocates remain concerned.

"I think the word is rapidly spreading in the legal community that this is a great way to get information," said Sobel. "I think it is only matter of time before it becomes the norm in divorce cases -- the possibilities are endless."

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

She speculated that one cause for the lack of subpoena notice may be the volume of subpoenas,

I wonder exactly how high the volume actually is.....

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

Italics off?

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

italics off?

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

;-D Thanks.

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

Deb,

When King David of Israel was given the choice to be punished by the hand of man, or the hand of God, David chose God because he was far more merciful than the hands of man would be....even though the punishment for his sim was the death of his own son.

Likewise Deborah, I fear God...but fear the hand of man much more.

I put my trust in Him, but that doesn't mean I walk willingly into a bear trap. Remember that all of the Disciples/Apostles were mayrtered horribly except for John who died in exile on the Isle of Patmos.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 30, 1999.

The necessity of faith in religious life and practice is something the "faithful" take for granted. The "Awakening of Faith" is considered an essential step in Buddhism, and while Zen may be thought of as nonconformist by some, on this point there really can be no disagreement. After all, taking up a practice that leads towards "enlightenment," a state that cannot be known until experienced, implies a faith that such an experience really does exist. Yet faith, as understood in Buddhism, is a very simple thing. It is gentle, flexible, and does not depend upon belief systems. We can see examples of faith like this in operation all around us if we look. It finds expression in a positive and gentle attitude towards life, and is identical with the acceptance that lies at the base of everything positive we do.

-- ZenMaster (Zen64@usa.net), July 30, 1999.

INVAR,

I understand.

Do you post a functional e-mail address?

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

Notice the business connections. In thinking of Y2K, what effect do you think this is likely to have on the already scanty "insider" reports of what is really happening behind the PR facade? [rhetorical question]

Or ANY kind of whistle-blowing.

See also the thread Is BIG BROTHER y2k compliant?

Land of the free, home of the brave. Yeah, right!

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), July 30, 1999.

It's laughable comparing yourself to the disciples and apostles Mr. Invar. Aren't you the same person that used vulgar phrases such as

Cream it up your ass

Ignorant Slut

Dumbshit

during a recent discussion on Timebomb 2000? I hardly think the government would think of you, even if your bizarre idea that they will be after the Christians were true. Rest easy my friend. Isn't there a verse that says something like what comes out of the mouth is what is in the heart, or something like that?

-- Yatalkinabout (whatda@heck.edu), July 30, 1999.

What a tragedy that those like invar are looked at as Christians. You couldn't be further from the God of the universe, my friend.

How unfortunate that his extremist talk and activity will bring persecution on worthy followers of Christ, along with shame to His name.

"The heart of man is deceitful and wicked...who can know it? Jer. 1:9"

-- Biblethumper (Jesus@is.God), July 30, 1999.

Biblethumper,

I tend to think of INVAR as one of the Warrior Christians. In a past life he might have been one of the defenders of Masada... or something similar.

Takes all kinds.

YOU however... are a POT... calling the KETTLE... BLACK.

(Are your actions "Christian?")

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

Dear Moderator: Thank you for your...uh,...moderation?

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), July 30, 1999.

Sorry Diane. A little history may help you out here. First of all, Masada was where the Jews held out against the Romans, nothing to do with Christianity.

Secondly, as a Christian, Mr. Invar would not believe in past lives so your argument is pointless.

And last but not least, Warrior Christian is a major contradiction of terms. When Peter chopped off the ear of the guard who came to arrest Jesus, Jesus rebuked him for it and healed the soldiers ear. Warrior Christian is the antithesis of compassionate, loving, kind, peaceful and long-suffering that describes believers in Christ. That's not to say in any way that Christians always act perfectly but it is definately enough to refute your validity of the term Warrior Christian.

-- TalkInAbout (whatda@heck.edu), July 30, 1999.

Faith as the basis of everyday actions? Many people would find that absurd, if not insulting. We want to believe that the choices we make are essentially rational ones. We tend to think that others, society in general, the whole world even, behaves that way. But when you think about it, the rational process comes a long way behind more gut level feelings as a basis for everyday behavior. How much reason is involved in a purchase of clothing, a record album, a set of dishes, even a house or car? When we feel hungry, how much of our desire is for calories, and how much is for Chinese food, or Mexican food? Economies and political structures rise and fall on intangibles like hope and confidence, or anxiety and fear of loss. Consider something even more basic. We drive on busy highways with nothing separating us from oncoming traffic but a line painted on the road. We will step out into an intersection with oncoming traffic in full view, with nothing to stop the cars but a red light on top of a pole. In these situations it is, I think, more a matter of trusting that the drivers of those cars hurtling towards us want, and will tend to act, in their own self interest. Without that trust it would be impossible for us to step off the curb, or to keep our minds on the business of controlling our own cars when driving. But underneath this trust is a deep intuition. In these situations we sense that other people, at their very core, think and feel much the same way we do. Accepting that is an act of faith. This simple kind of faith, forming the foundation of action in everyday life, is really the same faith that opens the door to the experience of complete unity with the entire universe. Like fish within the great ocean, we are at all times sustained and supported by this unity. We can never be separate from it, yet we are usually ignorant of it. Realizing this unity is the mystical experience of Zen. Awakening to simple, positive faith is a first step.

While we may not be quite so rational as we would like to believe, faith is much more natural to us than we think. This very natural faith requires no strain, just a little acceptance. So what is this "honest doubt" that Tennyson connects with faith? To hold an honest doubt is to want to know, above all, "What is true?" It is not negative skepticism to ask "Is my understanding of this correct?" or, "Is this really what it represents itself to be?" An honest doubt, with a little humility, is necessary for the recognition that Truth is so immense, so vast, that our understanding of it can only be quite small. While humbling, this recognition leaves us open to endless possibilities. In comparison, a negative, skeptical doubt is confining because with it we lose the sense of wonder so essential for uncovering what is not yet known. With an honest doubt we wish to understand, but not to limit other people, or other ways of understanding and expressing the Truth. So often a "creed" carries the implication "This is the Truth. Therefore, all else must be false." Belief in such a creed can squeeze out the space for questioning "What is True? Do I really understand?" It seems to me that when belief becomes rigid, without gentleness and flexibility, without room for honest doubt, real faith ceases to exist.

With an honest doubt we can recognize the imperfections in things, weigh them against their merits, and understand the value of a teaching or a practice. Eventually an honest doubt, along with gentle faith, will lead to an understanding of the real perfection, which lies hidden in all things. Religious traditions, and Zen is no different, is made up of individuals with strengths and weaknesses, faults and foibles, and, of course, the potential for enlightenment. If faith permits us to see enlightenment manifesting around us, and in the actions of others, honest doubt permits us to accept human nature as it is. The miracle of transformation that Zen training works upon us requires both of these. Gently accepting our own limitations, we can at last come to know enlightenment at work within ourselves too. To understand honest doubt, though, there is something else to consider. An honest doubt is one that is directed inwardly as much, if not more so, than it is toward outward things. To hold an honest doubt is to first say to oneself "I could be wrong," and then, secondly, to admit that "They could be wrong, too."

When I was in training at the monastery, I noticed that sometimes people would arrive there with unbridled enthusiasm and intensity. But often that enthusiasm would dry up in a day or two, and off they would go in search of something else. I remember one man, a university student, who arrived at the gate in the afternoon and announced that he had given up everything. He had come to spend the rest of his life in meditation at the monastery. All this without ever having visited or even written to the monastery before. He was sent to join me digging holes in the garden, which was part of our effort to put in a new septic system. I dug my holes, but his mind was elsewhere. He wanted to talk about Zen. He wanted me to understand how deeply he felt about becoming a monk. He was gone before dinner. His was a rather extreme case, perhaps, for he had the drive and the desire for enlightenment, born of dissatisfaction with his life. But he did not have the patience, the sense of direction, and the caution that comes with an honest doubt. Those seeking a "quick fix" will soon be disappointed with the simple practice of training within everyday life, and so they quickly set off to search for something else.

"When people stop believing in God, the problem is not that thereafter they believe in nothing, it is that thereafter they will believe in anything."

I heard this quote once, attributed to G.K. Chesterton, English essayist and novelist, and I was struck by the observation that people will despite protestations to the contrary, tend to hang their faith on some sort of belief system. On this subject, Chesterton wrote:

-- ZenMaster (zen64@usa.net), July 30, 1999.

Faith as the basis of everyday actions? Many people would find that absurd, if not insulting. We want to believe that the choices we make are essentially rational ones. We tend to think that others, society in general, the whole world even, behaves that way. But when you think about it, the rational process comes a long way behind more gut level feelings as a basis for everyday behavior. How much reason is involved in a purchase of clothing, a record album, a set of dishes, even a house or car? When we feel hungry, how much of our desire is for calories, and how much is for Chinese food, or Mexican food? Economies and political structures rise and fall on intangibles like hope and confidence, or anxiety and fear of loss. Consider something even more basic. We drive on busy highways with nothing separating us from oncoming traffic but a line painted on the road. We will step out into an intersection with oncoming traffic in full view, with nothing to stop the cars but a red light on top of a pole. In these situations it is, I think, more a matter of trusting that the drivers of those cars hurtling towards us want, and will tend to act, in their own self interest. Without that trust it would be impossible for us to step off the curb, or to keep our minds on the business of controlling our own cars when driving. But underneath this trust is a deep intuition. In these situations we sense that other people, at their very core, think and feel much the same way we do. Accepting that is an act of faith. This simple kind of faith, forming the foundation of action in everyday life, is really the same faith that opens the door to the experience of complete unity with the entire universe. Like fish within the great ocean, we are at all times sustained and supported by this unity. We can never be separate from it, yet we are usually ignorant of it. Realizing this unity is the mystical experience of Zen. Awakening to simple, positive faith is a first step.

While we may not be quite so rational as we would like to believe, faith is much more natural to us than we think. This very natural faith requires no strain, just a little acceptance. So what is this "honest doubt" that Tennyson connects with faith? To hold an honest doubt is to want to know, above all, "What is true?" It is not negative skepticism to ask "Is my understanding of this correct?" or, "Is this really what it represents itself to be?" An honest doubt, with a little humility, is necessary for the recognition that Truth is so immense, so vast, that our understanding of it can only be quite small. While humbling, this recognition leaves us open to endless possibilities. In comparison, a negative, skeptical doubt is confining because with it we lose the sense of wonder so essential for uncovering what is not yet known. With an honest doubt we wish to understand, but not to limit other people, or other ways of understanding and expressing the Truth. So often a "creed" carries the implication "This is the Truth. Therefore, all else must be false." Belief in such a creed can squeeze out the space for questioning "What is True? Do I really understand?" It seems to me that when belief becomes rigid, without gentleness and flexibility, without room for honest doubt, real faith ceases to exist.

With an honest doubt we can recognize the imperfections in things, weigh them against their merits, and understand the value of a teaching or a practice. Eventually an honest doubt, along with gentle faith, will lead to an understanding of the real perfection, which lies hidden in all things. Religious traditions, and Zen is no different, is made up of individuals with strengths and weaknesses, faults and foibles, and, of course, the potential for enlightenment. If faith permits us to see enlightenment manifesting around us, and in the actions of others, honest doubt permits us to accept human nature as it is. The miracle of transformation that Zen training works upon us requires both of these. Gently accepting our own limitations, we can at last come to know enlightenment at work within ourselves too. To understand honest doubt, though, there is something else to consider. An honest doubt is one that is directed inwardly as much, if not more so, than it is toward outward things. To hold an honest doubt is to first say to oneself "I could be wrong," and then, secondly, to admit that "They could be wrong, too."

When I was in training at the monastery, I noticed that sometimes people would arrive there with unbridled enthusiasm and intensity. But often that enthusiasm would dry up in a day or two, and off they would go in search of something else. I remember one man, a university student, who arrived at the gate in the afternoon and announced that he had given up everything. He had come to spend the rest of his life in meditation at the monastery. All this without ever having visited or even written to the monastery before. He was sent to join me digging holes in the garden, which was part of our effort to put in a new septic system. I dug my holes, but his mind was elsewhere. He wanted to talk about Zen. He wanted me to understand how deeply he felt about becoming a monk. He was gone before dinner. His was a rather extreme case, perhaps, for he had the drive and the desire for enlightenment, born of dissatisfaction with his life. But he did not have the patience, the sense of direction, and the caution that comes with an honest doubt. Those seeking a "quick fix" will soon be disappointed with the simple practice of training within everyday life, and so they quickly set off to search for something else.

"When people stop believing in God, the problem is not that thereafter they believe in nothing, it is that thereafter they will believe in anything."

I heard this quote once, attributed to G.K. Chesterton, English essayist and novelist, and I was struck by the observation that people will despite protestations to the contrary, tend to hang their faith on some sort of belief system. On this subject, Chesterton wrote: "Unless that part of the mind is satisfied by a faith it will be satisfied by a fad: those who have destroyed a church have only created a sect."

-- ZenMaster (zen64@usa.net), July 30, 1999.

Ooops sorry for the double post!!Today, instead of "sect," he no doubt would have used the word "cult." Chesterton wrote very skillfully about how our underlying belief systems, conscious or not, affect the way we live our lives. He then concluded that it is important to choose our belief system carefully. While I agree with him in part, there is a big difference between believing a "revealed Truth," and believing we can discover what is True. Nonetheless, his observations put a finger on something with regard to this matter of faith and doubt that I think is important. And that is, without the flexibility of seeking implied in an honest doubt, we are impaled on the necessity of belief. To me, belief can be a very formidable obstacle. Faith with an honest doubt is open ended, as we constantly search for what is true. When a religious "faith" demands rigid belief, without any doubt, the element of seeking for the Truth is gone. Without seeking, how can there be a spiritual path? To me, real faith embraces honest doubt, and requires very little in the way of belief. So often, when people throw off the yoke of one rigid set of beliefs, they flounder about, grasping first after this, then after that, like the fellow who came to the monastery to spend the rest of his life. Perhaps this explains why people turn to newspaper horoscopes, or authoritarian sects, religious or political, which offer all the answers in neat, simple packages. They trade one yoke for another before they realize what they have done, and this is what Chesterton saw. Simple faith and all-acceptance, with an honest doubt, can be very difficult to balance, but it is the only formula I can see for a truly spiritual life. It is my belief that real faith cannot exist without honest doubt, for without it we loose the humility and flexibility to seek the Truth.

Great Master Dogen, who brought Soto Zen from China to Japan, taught that the mind that seeks the Way, that wishes to know the Truth, is the Buddha Mind itself. To seek the Way. What a beautiful expression of enlightenment. It is full of faith, for it seeks an understanding that can only come with experience. It holds an honest doubt, for it is full of the humility to know we must always seek the Truth. Dogen also taught that to live by Zen is simply to follow the Way-seeking mind in a normal, everyday life. This means to live morally, and to cultivate charity, tenderness, benevolence, and sympathy in all the everyday ways our own lives present to us at work, at home, with friends, family, and with others who seek the Way. This sums up the essence of teaching and practice in Soto Zen. Why do we practice and teach in such a simple, even mundane way? It would actually be much easier to provide all the answers than to point the way for each to find the Truth for himself or herself in their own everyday lives. Or, as an option, we could mystify, bamboozle, or intimidate rather than instruct. If you emphasize how difficult Zen is to understand, and underline all the reasons why people cannot understand, you get yourself off the hook when they don't understand.

Mystification tends to be the Zen "creed" that gets in the way of simple faith with an honest doubt. But Zen practice is really very simple. It consists of meditation, moral precepts, and sincerity. Within such a practice, deep faith and realization arise very naturally. Why? Because along with the simple faith that we can, in fact, understand, the necessity of questioning with an honest doubt is not only recognized, it is encouraged. What mystery could withstand such a combination?

-- ZenMaster (Zen64@usa.net), July 30, 1999.

Bamboozle...such an eloquent description! LOL!

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), July 30, 1999.

BIBLE=FAITH is a GIFT from GOD. not something you can muster-up on your own.

-- faith. (dogs@zianet.com), July 30, 1999.

Last tat,

Yatalkin (aka:Craig),

Wasn't comparing myself to the Apostles at all. Was making a point. Better to suffer at the hand of God than of man...and yet God's servants tend to suffer the most ridicule, scoffing,persecution and even death in His service.

But you're too busy being a Pharisee.

Mr. Thumper,

I don't give a rats ass what you, or any other so-called "Christian" thinks or judges what my standing with God is. Today's Christianity steeped in tradition and emotionalism resembles NOTHING of what the New Testament Church founded by Christ was supposed to be, so cram it.

True followers of God should expect persecution. It is exactly what He said we would receive. If what I do and say brings persecution on those He has called, then I will have spoken the Truth as those who hate Truth will do all they can to silence it. I find it interesting that it is YOU who do the persecuting of me here as an "extremist", of which I wear that label proudly.

The god you worship is nothing at all like the God revealed in scripture. Your understanding of His purpose and plan for all mankind is shrouded in the deceitful Traditions and worship systems of men. You have been blinded and kept ignorant, as most of humanity has.

But one day, on that Great Day, your eyes and the eyes of everyone who has ever lived will be opened and the magnificence of His plan for mankind will be known and triumphed over all.

You sir, have a big surprise coming.

May He speed that day.

With no apologies, I resign.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 30, 1999.

Well... Barb,

Why someone thinks I have to have a moderate opinion at all times is beyond me. Especially about Y2K topics or long-time regular posters. Beats me. When I was under a very vengeful attack, for a month last year... by JBD... it was INVAR who finally routed the cyber-attacker. For that, Im grateful. Not that I necessarily approve of his methods or his words, but he did do me a favor. Nothing else had worked.

When he... or anyone... who has become a long-time forum friend... is under attack (for no reason whatsoever or for anything said on this thread), especially by one of the most heinous TROLLS on this Forum, posing as a lamb actually wearing wolfs clothing, well, then I just might choose to say something. Or not. (Often depends on who I've been attacked by lately, and where they're coming from).

TalkInAbout,

Gee, I mustve read a different history book.

It was my understanding that the Masada stand-off took place about 69- 70 A.D. and was a group of radiacal Jews that also had Chrisitan ties, and some linkages to the Essenes at Qumran. That is the Warrior Christian imagery I was referring to. Yeshua did espouse a gentler way, thankfully. Wish more would walk the talk.

If interested, see...

Qumran, Essene, Dead Sea Scrolls Discussion Board - for scholarly discussion concerning the Essenes, the Qumran Community, the Dead Sea Sectaries, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Masada and New Testament personalities. ...

http://qumran.com/qumran/

Or... just search on any engine for information related to the: Dead Sea Scrolls.

Back to Y2K. And hopefully, some continued civility.

Diane

(Thank you ZenMaster... my how the thread turns.)

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

To Diane......

Why is it when Invar is even questioned in the slightest and he throws a tantrum and uses extremely foul language, you don't blink an eye and you actually support him?

However when he uses the most disgusting filth directed at me, a member of this forum for at least as long as him, and refuses to even apologize for it you say nothing?

IMHO, the main duty of the moderator is to remain neutral and ensure there is a fair playing field for all. If you allow his use of vulgar language then you are in no position to reprimand anyone else for whatever is written here.

Fair is fair.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), July 30, 1999.

Craig, you sound like my 11 year old girl throwing a fit!

LOL!!

It's not fair!!!

-- @@-- (a.@aa.com), July 30, 1999.

Back to the topic on Anon. Posting...

Perhaps what we really need is an anonomous posting "service" that is offshore...

PS I post to this forum using my real e-mail address.

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), July 30, 1999.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), July 29, 1999. wrote:

"Aw.......too bad INVAR......I'm having a great evening......you lost your temper because I don't believe that CNN said that "ANY" Y2K- related disruptions will really be caused by cyber terrorists that are currently working on fixing the Y2K bug."

After reviewing the entire thread for a second time it appears that INVAR was actually set off by the arrogant and condescending sniper fire coming from you Craig.

Maybe you could see more clearly if you concentrate on the removal of the sequoia from your own eye, instead of the toothpick in INVAR's.

-- (cujo@baddog.byte), July 29, 1999.

-- -- (cujo@baddog.byte), July 30, 1999.

In Buddhist teaching, the law of karma, says only this: `for every event that occurs, there will follow another event whose existence was caused by the first, and this second event will be pleasant or unpleasant according as its cause was skillful or unskillful.' A skillful event is one that is not accompanied by craving, resistance or delusions; an unskillful event is one that is accompanied by any one of those things. (Events are not skillful in themselves, but are so called only in virtue of the mental events that occur with them.) Therefore, the law of Karma teaches that responsibility for unskillful actions is born by the person who commits them.

-- ZenMaster (Zen64@usa.net), July 30, 1999.

Another doomer exposing the complete lack of wit he obviously has.....hehehehehehehe

I'm not whining @@.......merely trying to get a straight answer from Diane. Perhaps INVAR did save her from the big bad JBD a while back......however that does not give him special status, or should not.

My question was quite simple and still awaits an answer. I am, or anyone else, free to use phrases like "Cream it up your ass" or "Ignorant Slut" as INVAR has used, or is it any less acceptable to use the phrase "Fucking Idiot".

I much prefer to have discussion on a more mature level but am sick and tired of boneheads like INVAR coming back with nothing but shit language.

The point is simple: Say yes it is allowed, or no it will not be tolerated. Whatever you do, don't have a double standard.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), July 30, 1999.

Craig,

I have had more flames, untruths, yelling and digital rock throwing aimed at me, that any ten people on this forum since last October! Mostly... by trolls, or those who would qualify. Whatever has been directed at you has been feather-weight by comparison.

INVAR wasnt questioned on this thread... he was attacked, for being who he is. With that, I can relate. Especially after the past couple daze.

He was asked a simple question by Deborah... Do you fear man, or God?

And he answered. Then he was first attacked by... Yatalkinabout.. and we BOTH know who that was. Then the attack was followed up by the false Biblethumper, and I'm aware of who that was too.

Well, forgive me for being an unmoderate human, but after the recent Witch attacks, Im just a tad tired of it all.

Life isnt fair Craig. And after Ive been attacked, repeatedly, by the crowd you choose to run with, well, dont expect me to be either.

Karma... it does come down to that, doesn't it ZenMaster?

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

Game, set, match ZenMaster. Well done!

Best wishes,

-- Bingo1 (howe9@pop.shentel.net), July 30, 1999.

Mad Monk,

To get back to the original topic, I have sent a e to Phil Greenspun asking what the policies discussed above are.

Will post when I hear back from him... it IS summer vacation time.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

"I tend to think of INVAR as one of the Christian warriors." Diane, you're like a besotted mother who thinks her killer son is persecuted and misunderstood. Most of us see him for what he is, which is not a pretty sight.

In my entire lifetime I've never been talked to by anyone like I was by that warped "Christian ." I suppose you think it's very brave of him to talk to other posters like that. And when he said he was leaving the forum, which we all knew was just so much bull, you would have thought JFK, Jr. was leaving. Check out the testimonials heaped on this blaborous giganteaus.

But he's Diane's pet pangolin and nothing he says or does is offensive to her.

Craig, I don't mind profanity in the context of a post, but when it comes from INVAR, it isn't profanity, it is pure filth. Him apologize??? Ha! He's so wrapped up in his scaly self, he probably thinks we owe him an apology for not falling to our knees after hearing one of his paranoid rants. If Invar's a Christian, then I ask the Christian God to protect me from this Christian Hun.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), July 30, 1999.

In the West, we are not really that familiar with the concept of Karma simply because it is little discussed. Even Christians, who read the Bible, and are therefore familiar with "sowing and reaping", fail to realize that the concept of "sowing and reaping" is Karma.

Action - reaction is another way to look at Karma. There are many absolute laws in Creation. Gravity is one. Birth and death are two aspects of another. The Law of Karma is another. In essence, the Law of Karma is that for every action, there is an opposite reaction, and this Law is an absolute, and thus, must be fulfilled.

What most fail to understand, East and West, is that there are three forms of Karma. These are: pralabdh (or fate - the experiential plan for a particular allocated life); sinchit, or reserve (stored-each life we create much more than we can pay off); and kriyaman (daily karma). The karma created daily can be disposed of in that very life, or become sinchit, or stored karma to be applied in another life.

This brings us immediately to the related concept of reincarnation. The concept of karma would not make sense without reincarnation, or the concept of multiple lives. In the West, with our Christian view of the single life notion, the concept of karma requiring multiple lives has not been seriously entertained.

How one's Karma (all three types) form the basis for personality will be discussed in monograph 12. Personality. Perhaps the most salient fact of karma is that it, and not the illusion of "free will" determines one's choices in life. This concept must remain separate from the considerations we make on the physical, behavioral plane. The concept of karma is important for the individual, for therapists, and for full understanding of the operational understanding of the human being... but, it has little to offer relative to the illusory life we must all lead on the physical plane of Creation. This is no doubt the reason karma is considered an "esoteric" study in the West.

-- ZenMaster (zen64@usa.net), July 30, 1999.

inVAr!!!!!

WHy arT THou takING THy leAVE??????? whY DOsT NOt diETeR BELievE THat yOU caN KIck THis habIT??????? is IT beCAusE OF yoUR PASt reSOLUtioNS ThaT HAvE FAiLed???????? oF COurSE!!!!!! AS HavE FAIled THe reSOLUtioNS OF dieTER!!!!!!

alSO!!!!! INvaR!!!!! If tHINe oBSERvaTIOn IS TruE, aND THE maRChiNG Of THE brOWNshIRTS Is hERE, whY, OH whY DO You RUn awAY???????? WeLL????? SPeaK Up jaCKaL!!!!!!! iS THis hOW TO deFEAt tHE DArk sIDE?????? By cowERIng ANd ruNNinG AWay???????? wELL?????? vicTOry tHROUgh HIdiNG?????

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), July 30, 1999.

Moderator - Are we all free to use profanity here or just select members?

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0019wb

St. Louis, I loved your post. I'm so sick of mollycoddled, nit pickers accusing anyone that says *shit* of having a limited vocabulary. I'll put my vocabulary up against "nowyaknow's" anytime.

Will continue, maybe you better take a seat, because I'm gonna' scare you by agreeing with you completely. I'm sick of the language police being so offended by words. I guess we should all become clones so as to not offend the shrinking violet crowd.

I guess I'll do what I always do when confronted by the language police. I'll just resort to the language of Shakespeare. This is language at it's finest and the literati of the world agrees. So cogitate on that awhie, you "crusty botch of nature."

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), July 30, 1999.

-- (???@???.???), July 30, 1999.

Diane: I must congratulate this forum. It is far more entertaining on this site than watching regular TV. It is educational no end and amusing no end. I would have thought King of Spain(our favorite) would have contributed to the start of this weekend's festivities! Release the hounds!

-- Neil G.Lewis (pnglewis1@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

Neil,

Im laughing so hard I about spit up on the keyboard!

Yes, gilda, I agree. INVAR has often been a "crusty botch of nature." But then... so has Dieter.

Again... the Y2K weekend--or not--begins. And its cable free.

Gawd! I need a spiked latte!

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), July 30, 1999.

No calls for opinions here. Just an example of moderation...as given.

-- Barb (awaltrip@telepath.com), July 31, 1999.

"Secondly, as a Christian, Mr. Invar would not believe in past lives so your argument is pointless..."

Bullshit.

The original Christians believed in reincarnation up to the 4th or 5th century when some corrupt POPE outlawed all mention of it - hard to have the flock under control if they believed that they could come back and start again...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 31, 1999.

INVAR,

Keep the Faith.

If we were as "sensitive" as the rest of the world there would cease to be a foundation in reason.

Let your Faith in God be your Rudder and your life be the Medium through which you Steer.

Father

-- Thomas G. Hale (hale.tg@att.net), July 31, 1999.

In the big picture Y2K is a blip in time. There is no indication Christ had anything personally to do with the date structure we have today.

The problem is with a date structure not with a spiritual belief.

Get out of the box folks and look around.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), July 31, 1999.

INVAR, your views on the corruption of Christianity are quite correct in my view, right down to the "cram it". I have struggled with the fact that free speech does not apply to discussions of government or political views. The government will decide who is allowed 'free speech' and who isn't. Freedom died along time ago. All the more reason to call a duck a duck. If Janet wants to show up in my driveway and haul off a 40 year old mother of three, for slamming Blow Job Billy and suggesting the 'true' terrorists exist in WDC, so be it. BTW, I've sent some of your views to my parents, they are most impressed by your patriotism but even more impressed by your willingness to voice them in our current environment. (also, my mother would love to know how old you are) ;)

gilda, ooooops.(and just when we find common ground. darn) You have made your political view quite clear to me, as well as your Christain view. I find it humorous that you seem surprised INVAR might find you *exasperating*, to say the least. Surely this isn't a new revelation to you, as I'm quite certain just about everyone I know, and have come in contact with, would feel the same way, if confronted by you on either of these two subjects. I'm quite certain you have absolutely nothing to fear from the current Marxist regime.

Craig, Me tinks yo widdo feewings is huwt. Saaa-weeeee. Bedder wuck nex time.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 31, 1999.

TalkInAbout,

You said,

"And last but not least, Warrior Christian is a major contradiction of terms. When Peter chopped off the ear of the guard who came to arrest Jesus, Jesus rebuked him for it and healed the soldiers ear. Warrior Christian is the antithesis of compassionate, loving, kind, peaceful and long-suffering that describes believers in Christ. That's not to say in any way that Christians always act perfectly but it is definately enough to refute your validity of the term Warrior Christian."

If you take the time to read your Bible you will find that Christians are not ever told to be pacifist. 'Tis a lie! How about one of Jesus' names...Man of War?

Don't you think that all the Prophets, King David were Christian? How could that be? Pre or Post does not matter. Looking forward to the promise or looking back on the promise what is the difference? You are a believer either way.

Time for Christians to get off their behinds and stop allowing the Idumians to control. "Occupy till I return."

The Morning Star

-- Mark Hillyard (foster@inreach.com), July 31, 1999.

A response... on the anon issue...

Subject: Re: What Is The Greenspun Policy On Anonymous Posters?
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 22:03:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Philip Greenspun

Nobody has ever given me a subpoena so I haven't drafted a policy. We don't keep logs anyway (beyond a few days) so the feds probably wouldn't have much luck.
###

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), July 31, 1999.

You just had to go and make me think, didn't ya Dieter? I hAtE you fOr it iNfIdel!!!!

Yes this forum is a hard habit to break. All of you regulars I consider friends, because I learn and glean much from all of you. It was a bit easier to avoid posting when I turned preps up into high gear, as I was filled with busy-ness. but I did lurk daily. Posting again was the result of a little time available to do so, and because many had asked for me to come back periodically when I announced I was taking a break. When I saw this forum under attack almost daily by idiots, imbeciles and insidious trolls disguised as reasonable debaters, I was vexed with a decision.

How can I abandon my friends? Especially while lurking and discovering TB2000 was targeted for disruption by cpr and his minions at debunkers?

But Dieter raised good questions that I needed to reflect and think on: If tHINe oBSERvaTIOn IS TruE, aND THE maRChiNG Of THE brOWNshIRTS Is hERE, whY, OH whY DO You RUn awAY???????? WeLL????? SPeaK Up jaCKaL!!!!!!! iS THis hOW TO deFEAt tHE DArk sIDE?????? By cowERIng ANd ruNNinG AWay???????? wELL?????? vicTOry tHROUgh HIdiNG?????

Sometimes Dieter, the best way to attack and defeat your opponents is by laying low and concealing your position and intentions (both defensive and offensively) for the time being, rather than standing in the open in a single file line that will be easily mowed down. Then you are more able to protect yourself and be a useful instrument when the time comes, to secure your goals. This is part of a philosophy I learned and taught my students in Taekwon-do: In adversity, be like the grass, so when the enemy's rage blows hard, bend and when he has spent himself, you will still be upright. This is true when ridiculously outnumbered and have overwhelming odds set against you. Just ask the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan about that.

I think in this politically charged society...this is also true. I do not trust, but loathe and despise this most tyrrannical government we have in Washington...specifically the Executive Branch. You cannot deny the technique of demouguoging and scapegoating that they engage in for political position. Then they (thusfar with a few exceptions) politcally assasinate them. Just ask Ken Starr (who again was APPOINTED by Janet Reno) or Linda Tripp, or George Stephanopoulous about the vengeance of this White House.

With that precedent, I see the same methods being employed by those in power to grease the Y2K skids of scapegoating and deflection. The post above on ID-ing the IP of anonymous posters on Discussion Groups rings alarm bells so loud in my head I'm practically deaf. Just ask yourself, what if cpr decides to go this route by filing a lawsuit against some of you on this board, if to do nothing more than scare any posting and thus shut it down? Hmmmm?

I would much prefer a straight fight than all this sneakin' around Dieter. I would much rather fight on the battlefields of ideology, or if needed the fields of honor in combat than to face a military stormtrooper seizure of my place ala Ruby Ridge or Waco for nothing more than to be made an example of and to generate a climate of fear among those who have prepared and want to defend what is theirs. Worse yet would be a stirred-up public thinking folks like me are the problem, and have my neighbors round cops up on my property because they say I'm a hoarder and dangerous...all so they can get a reward or extra ration.

I don't care if you think that is paranoid. Survival is looking at EVERY conceivable possibility and having a plan to deal with it should it arise.

Running away and hiding? Perhaps. I'd like to think of it as lying low with enough ideological and actual firepower to engage later at a more opportune time, or to defend myself.

Thomas, Brian and of course Andy...thanks for the support.

Will, we are in agreement. It's too bad the majority of those in this nation are fast asleep about the shackles of slavery being tightened around their necks in the guise of safety and security. Standing up and being bold about the truth always invites the arrows of those seeking to silence it...and no better illustration of that than in this currrent climate. To remain silent and concealed will be difficult because I am a warrior by nature when I get pissed-off, but you would never know it upon casual accquaintance. I'd much rather fight for and proclaim boldly truths to which I am convicted...and I'm sure it will be hard for me to be silent.

To be bold and speak conviction in the face of adversity, invites harm upon yourself and family...perhaps even to death. Am I strong enough to continue being unabashedly bold as to my beliefs? I guess that will depend on if I am not only willing to sacrifice myself (which I am), but the lives of my family and friends. To those that ridicule that notion as unmitigated hubris on my part, I place myself in the good company of those men that sacrificed personal wealth, property, family and friends at the signing of the Declaration of Independance...and millions of those that followed by cutting a nation from the wilderness, and then fought, sacrificed and died for the freedoms we now take for granted.

And to Mark Hillyard, Amen. At last, someone who has read and understood both history and Scripture.

Oh, and one more thing......for Will. I'm an ancient 35 years this last June.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), July 31, 1999.