RE: Hackers branded as terrorists was: (no subject)

(The purpose of this post, Chris, is to counter-balance the other post and
to emphasize that there are some areas where we are BASICALLY the same.  Not
that ANY two individuals are the same...  That would be foolish, as even
identical twins are quite a bit different...)

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-nontech-admin@midrange.com
[mailto:midrange-nontech-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Chris Rehm
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 1:15 AM
To: midrange-nontech@midrange.com
Subject: Re: Hackers branded as terrorists was: (no subject)


On Saturday 29 September 2001 07:50 pm, jt wrote:
> Chris,
>
> (BTW, I wrote all but the first few lines of that last post, over on
USA911,
> before dinner.)
>
> I'm going to cut to the quick:  Since we agree on the bottom line, what's
> the point of the rest of the argument...?

I don't think we do agree on the bottom line. It seems to me that you feel (
or I should say, "I thought you stated...") that the jurors in the OJ case
did not deliberate the case enough and presented an invalid verdict.

>> That is my contention.  IMHO.



My
contention is that the jurors were the ones who actually saw the evidence
presented in the courtroom.

>> True.


I feel they reached what could very well be a
reasonable verdict based on the evidence they saw presented given real world
situation.

>> I suppose it is theoretically possible.



> As it happens, my understanding of the law is not great.  But it is that
the
> jurists are not ALLOWED BY LAW, to discuss the case prior to
deliberations.
>
> Either they broke the law, they didn't deliberate the facts sufficiently,
> they saw clearly what the rest of the country did not see clearly, or you
> are starting with the assumption that I'm not seeing this clearly and
> working backwards to derive your arguments.

I don't even get what you are saying here. I did not state that the jurors
had discussed the case before sent to deliberate.

>> No...  I did...  I believe there is some question about this, so I
brought it up.  I also stated that even if there were no actual discussions,
it wouldn't take a Houdini to figure it out.


I stated I felt that the
case was particularly well covered in the courtroom. To me, a short
deliberation tends to indicate that the jurors were in agreement and didn't
feel that issues still needed to be clarified.

>> I think many in this country would beg to differ.  I think the opposite
judgment in the civil case clearly calls this contention into question.

>> Furthermore, I think the this issue of OJ's guilt or innocence is still
very devisive, and that's why Jay Leno still gets roars of laughter, and
moans, with his OJ jokes. (What... 2 or 3 years after the case...  My Wife
says this happened around 1994, but OJ is still the butt of all these
jokes...)



I know that I could be completely wrong. They could have simply all been
well
bribed. But I don't have information on that.

>> ICBW, too...  I do feel it's doubtful they were bribed.  Far more likely
that they either made a good judgment, or they goofed.

>> I'm willing to give you the last word, and then, in all probability, I
will refrain from commenting further.  I would suggest that it is also
theoretically possible that if you and I, Chris, gave this forum a little
space, some others (possibly from outside the 400 community) might be
inclined to discuss other issues.


>> You know...  My wife gets bored by these kinds of posts, and doesn't read
many of them.  But when I told her of our debates, she just shook her head.
(If I have any common-sense, I learn it from her...:=)  She said "Why would
you bother with all that, on a beautiful day like today...  Why not do that
kind of stuff in Winter..."  And she added "I don't see the point anyway...
Everybody knows that the rich have a lot easier time getting their way...
Not just in the Courts, in everything..."


>> Well... I think she was half-right and I think, Chris, that we both agree
with her.  (I'm not trying to speak for you, however.)  But I told her that
this was EXACTLY the crux of the situation, and why it belonged on the
USA911 list:  to many people in the World, we Americans are the ones with
all the money, and we generally get our way with things.  I don't
necessarily see it as quite that simple, but many people in the World do...
These are tough issues, and IMHO, need to be discussed.  The OJ debate arose
out of a few lines in a post that was trying to make the same kind of
statement my Wife made...

>> She's right about one thing:  I'm burned out on writing...  Huffed,
played, spent...  Sure am looking forward to concentrating on work on
Monday.  That will seem like a breeze...;=)



>> On a more philosophical bent:

>> Chris... if you read everything that I've posted in public, you can see
my growth from lurker, to writer, to activist, to philosopher.  These were
not done sequentially, but iterrively (sp?).  Most of this growth occurred
in private correspondence, so don't be fooled into thinking you can
comprehend me by reading my public posts, nor by intellect alone.

>> Last night, I randomly opened to The House of Imran:80, in The Koran:

"How shall God guide a people who have disbelieved
after they believed, and bore witness that the
Messenger is true, and the clear signs came to them?
God guides not the people of the evildoers.
Those--their recompense is that there shall rest
on them the curse of God and of the angels
and of men, altogether, therein dwelling forever;
the chastisement shall not be lightened
for them; no respite shall be given them.
But those who repent thereafter, and make amends--
God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.
Surely those who disbelieve after they have believed
and then increase in unbelief--their repentance
shall not be accepted; those are the ones who stray."

>> What's the point...? ? ?   I continue to search.  I search for the
Messenger, and pray that I do not stray...  That's all...  Just happened to
read that last night...


>> Namaste'

>> jjt

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Never put anyone out of your heart..."
                ...Maharaj-ji

 Ram Dass Tape Library Foundation
     "http://ramdasstapes.org"
 524 San Anselmo Avenue #203
     San Anselmo, California
                       94960
__________________________________

"In India when we meet and part we often say, "Namaste',"
which means I honor the place in you where the entire
universe resides, I honor the place in you of love, of
light, of truth, of peace.  I honor the place within you
where if you are in that place in you and I am in that
place in me, there is only one of us.  Namaste'"

-Ram Dass, Grist For the Mill
__________________________________


--
Chris Rehm
javadisciple@earthlink.net

And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart...
...Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other
commandment greater than these. Mark 12:30-31