"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
news:km8l62582brvarn53a6j83pek7spktjkm8@4ax.com...
>
> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
> opinion.]

Considering he is a frequent guest and speaker at the Scientology activities
in LA, I am suspect of anything he says today...

That is very reasonable and doable.

*+-zero tolerance policy regarding crime including DUI, speeding tickets,
*+-driving without a license, drunk and disorderly... IN other words,
*+-deport those who volunteer for deportation. And hope that we can
*+-assimilate the rest.


- = -
Vasos-Peter John Panagiotopoulos II, Reagan Mozart Pindus BioStrategist
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/vjp2/vasos.htm
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Ignore webs which don't work with http://lynx.browser.org/]
[Regulation begets corruption] [Urb Sprawl confounds terror]
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]

On Wed, 17 May 2006 04:21:48 GMT, "David Eduardo"
<amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:

>
>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>news:km8l62582brvarn53a6j83pek7spktjkm8@4ax.com...
>>
>> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
>> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
>> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
>> opinion.]
>
>Considering he is a frequent guest and speaker at the Scientology activities
>in LA, I am suspect of anything he says today...
>
You don;t like what anyone has to say when it is against your illegals
that you love so much.
--

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an
American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else,
for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.
But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...

There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also,
isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red
flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign
flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English
language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

~~Theodore Roosevelt, 1919

Just yesterday in rec.arts.sf.written, I had brought up that no writers
in the SciFi community were addressing the issue of runaway
immigration/communism, but that there are MANY recent stories by
left-leaning authors that
tend to paint the future as being controlled by "evil" conservatives -
here are just a few:

Steele's COYOTE trilogy
Bova's ROCK RATS trilogy
Baxter's EVOLUTION

I'm glad to see someone is addressing these issues in the SciFi
community.

- Stewart

Alcibiades wrote:
> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
> opinion.]
>
> http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/view414.html#Tuesday
>
> Reflections on Immigration:
>
> Under currently proposed legislation, we will import up to 100 million
> -- that's 10^8 people -- legally and legalized illegals -- in twenty
> years or so. I do not believe that the Melting Pot can deal with that
> dilution to the American character.
>
> In fact I do not believe that we can assimilate the number of illegal
> immigrants we already have. The legal immigration program already
> admits too many people at the bottom end of society if you count
> families: elders imported to be on Social Security because the Old
> Country doesn't have decent pensions. And so forth. Add to that the
> illegal immigrants and the very character of the American Experiment
> in Self Government is at stake.
>
> Democracy is a dangerous form of government. There never was a
> democracy that did not commit suicide. The Framers opted for a federal
> republic, a Nation of States, an experiment in ordered liberty with
> variants. That has endured for a long time. It was transformed into a
> more unitary state by the Civil War, but even that did not destroy the
> fundamental character of these United States. I know there are those
> who argue that the Civil War ended the American experiment; I remind
> them that despair is a sin, and that in fact as late as 1938
> Washington, DC was a small town in Maryland, "Don't make a Federal
> Case of this" was a meaningful expression, the FBI office in a major
> city might have half a dozen Agents and as many clerical staff, and so
> forth.
>
> Since the Civil War the US went from Federal Republic to National
> Democracy, but it did so slowly, and until Earl Warren and his
> Imperial Judiciary it ran up against limits. Now we are going further
> down that axis toward a French-style Centralized Bureaucratic Rule. We
> are becoming a national democracy.
>
> There never was a democracy that did not commit suicide.
>
> But even those who have long advocated democracy have always known
> that a democracy is not a form of government compatible with cultural
> and linguistic diversity. The Swiss Exception is instructive:
> Switzerland is a democracy, and it is diverse in both language and
> confession -- and it is not unitary. Few Swiss can name their
> President although most can tell you the name of the Canton and
> Commune officials relevant to their lives. A national democracy cannot
> endure as a culturally diverse society with cultural, linguistic, and
> religious diversities. It cannot. Ours will not.
>
> The American Melting Pot model of assimilation to a single language,
> and a wide-based Judao-Christian ethical and religious culture, might
> be able to endure nationalization. Might. That would be an interesting
> experiment. But it is 100% certain that the Melting Pot cannot handle
> great dilution, and that it takes time for it to work. Adding tens of
> millions of illegals plus larger numbers of legal immigrants will
> destroy the model and force our national democracy into the typical
> defects of a large national democracy, and thus to extinction. This is
> about as certain as anything we know about history.
>
> Apparently no one in Washington understands this.
>
> If they did, they would close the borders NOW, not in 2008.
>
> As to how, it's simple: call it 2000 miles of border. At $1 million
> per mile that is $2 billion/year, a drop in the Budget. Hand that
> money on a per/mile basis to each border county sheriff, with
> provision that it must be spent on border control -- apprehension and
> confinement. Now hand every border city $20 million a year for the
> same purposes. Hand each Border State $50 million a year, again solely
> for border enforcement. The whole program will cost less than the
> illegals cost us now.
>
> And yes, there are details to be worked out, including rewards for
> performance and penalties for non-performance, and I took the numbers
> out of the top of my head; but it would work a lot better than sending
> 6,000 Guardsmen down to the border for TWO WEEK SHIFTS. The present
> plan will do nothing. It won't even LOOK as if it is doing something,
> which is its only purpose anyway.
>
> Close the border now. Deport all illegals who come to the attention of
> the police courts. Insist that any legalization program includes
> instruction in English, Civics, American History, and such, and have a
> zero tolerance policy regarding crime including DUI, speeding tickets,
> driving without a license, drunk and disorderly... IN other words,
> deport those who volunteer for deportation. And hope that we can
> assimilate the rest. And do that NOW.
>
> Apparently no one in Washington understands what is at stake.
>
> Daily we sow the wind.
>
> ----------------------

 
"Graphic Queen" <pagan@pagan.com> wrote in message
news:30cm625m8dtp0unvvdrc96iag3d2741j0l@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 04:21:48 GMT, "David Eduardo"
> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>>news:km8l62582brvarn53a6j83pek7spktjkm8@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
>>> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
>>> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
>>> opinion.]
>>
>>Considering he is a frequent guest and speaker at the Scientology
>>activities
>>in LA, I am suspect of anything he says today...
>>
> You don;t like what anyone has to say when it is against your illegals
> that you love so much.

I did not say that. I used to love Pournelle in Byte, and enjoyed his
pre-90's books, but since he started showing up at CCHR and similar
activities, I wonder. Just like I wonder about Tom Cruise.

On Wed, 17 May 2006 04:21:48 GMT, "David Eduardo"
<amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:

>
>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>news:km8l62582brvarn53a6j83pek7spktjkm8@4ax.com...
>>
>> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
>> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
>> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
>> opinion.]
>
>Considering he is a frequent guest and speaker at the Scientology activities
>in LA, I am suspect of anything he says today...
>

Well Mr Radio, you step in it there. You are remarkably uninformed,
eager to cast aspersions upon good men on the basis of your own
ignorance and poor charactor.

I guess this means we really do have to take the certainties you type
in for us in api as attempts to hornswoggle, eh?

-------------

Jerry Pournelle covers Scientology cult's censorship at awards

From: "Fredric L. Rice" <frice@skeptictank.org>
Organization: The Skeptic Tank
Subject: Jerry Pournelle covers Scientology cult's censorship at
awards
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:20:51 GMT

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/currentview.html#amusing Grab this
puppy today. A colleague of mine forwarded to be a URL for this and
informs me that it will be moved to the archives shortly. Yet in
extract:

I promised you an amusing story.

The Writers of the Future contest was set up by L. Ron Hubbard,
founder of Dianetics and the Church of Scientology.

It is operated by his literary estate, Author Services Incorporated,
which has close ties to Scientology. One may have varying views about
Scientology, but the contest is quite straightforward and does a lot
of good. The judges are science fiction writers including myself,
Larry Niven, Greg Benford, Charles Sheffield, Fred Pohl, Tim Powers,
Jack Williamson, and a cast of plaster, and the contest is conducted
under the supervision of coordinating judge Algis Budrys whose
integrity is unquestionable. If any of the winners of the contest have
been Scientologists I don't know it for a fact (no reason why someone
might not be) but I do know for a fact that a lot of winners are
definitely not.

[..]

Jerry Pournelle wrote:

"I have friends who are fanatic Scientology haters, and I have friends
who are, I think, members in good standing of the Church of
Scientology (and in the case of one of them, also a member in good
standing of his Reform Jewish Temple, so apparently there's no
conflict there). I have good friends who hate the Mormon Church, and
other friends including Orson Scott Card who are members in good
standing of it (as is one of the current presiding judges of the
Writers of the Future contest).

I don't insist that my friends like each other.

I also don't have to have an opinion about the Church of Scientology,
because it doesn't operate the Writers of the Future, and has no
influence over who wins it. That much I can guarantee. The contest
isn't rigged. Algis Budrys wouldn't have anything to do with it if
there were the slightest chance of that. Nor would I.

Hubbard founded and left money for the Writers and Artists of the
Future contests, and those are at least as legitimate as most of the
other foundations people leave as their memorials. I find the company
congenial, my fellow judges are all both friends and people I respect,
it helps new writers, and I know the contest is conducted fairly. And
I have a lot of fun at the awards, which are pretty much open to the
public. I think you need a ticket but they're free."

-----------------

It's nice to see that a science fiction writer is appreciating the
problem.

I'm actually in favor of increasing the level of _legal_ immigration.
The problem with our current policy is that we have set a low legal
immigration quota but are not actually enforcing it, with the result
that we are getting millions of illegal immigrants whose first lesson
in the American Way is "ignore the law." This is dangerous. We are
also doing this within the context of a public policy that generally
urges immigrants NOT to assimilate. This is doubly dangerous. And we
are doing this at the same time that we are fighting a Terrorist foe
who has already begun to make alliances with Latin American radicalism
(read any of the stories on Hugo Chavez, particularly his proposed
weapons sales to Iran). This is _suicidally_ dangerous.

We need to pick a level of immigration that we feel we can live with,
set up policies to _assimilate_ those immigrants, and then allocate the
necessary funding and pass the necessary laws to _enforce_ these
policies. If we don't, we are facing not only a cultural problem but,
possibly, a Fifth Column threat. And the reaction to _that_, if
Terrorists do manage to sneak in to do major damage using the Latin
American immigrants for cover, will NOT be favorable to _any_ American
Latinos.

(which would be very unfair, as American Latinos actually tend to be
quite patriotic on the whole. But that's what would happen).

- Jordan

 
MURS radios wrote:
> Just yesterday in rec.arts.sf.written, I had brought up that no writers
> in the SciFi community were addressing the issue of runaway
> immigration/communism, but that there are MANY recent stories by
> left-leaning authors that
> tend to paint the future as being controlled by "evil" conservatives -
> here are just a few:
>
> Steele's COYOTE trilogy
> Bova's ROCK RATS trilogy
> Baxter's EVOLUTION
>
> I'm glad to see someone is addressing these issues in the SciFi
> community.
You have forgotten Greg Bear's _Slant_ : Evil, rich old man, out to
destroy the world. Well, everone, who is not like us.

Karl M. Syring
--
Rupert Murdoch Unveils Fake News Channel
http://humorix.org/articles/2006/04/murdoch/

On 17 May 2006 10:13:10 -0700, "Jordan" <JSBassior2001@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>It's nice to see that a science fiction writer is appreciating the
>problem.
>
>I'm actually in favor of increasing the level of _legal_ immigration.
>The problem with our current policy is that we have set a low legal
>immigration quota but are not actually enforcing it, with the result
>that we are getting millions of illegal immigrants whose first lesson
>in the American Way is "ignore the law." This is dangerous. We are
>also doing this within the context of a public policy that generally
>urges immigrants NOT to assimilate. This is doubly dangerous. And we
>are doing this at the same time that we are fighting a Terrorist foe
>who has already begun to make alliances with Latin American radicalism
>(read any of the stories on Hugo Chavez, particularly his proposed
>weapons sales to Iran). This is _suicidally_ dangerous.
>
>We need to pick a level of immigration that we feel we can live with,
>set up policies to _assimilate_ those immigrants, and then allocate the
>necessary funding and pass the necessary laws to _enforce_ these
>policies. If we don't, we are facing not only a cultural problem but,
>possibly, a Fifth Column threat. And the reaction to _that_, if
>Terrorists do manage to sneak in to do major damage using the Latin
>American immigrants for cover, will NOT be favorable to _any_ American
>Latinos.
>
>(which would be very unfair, as American Latinos actually tend to be
>quite patriotic on the whole. But that's what would happen).
>
>- Jordan

That's interesting. Although I cannot understand why more legal
immigration is desirable. As has been pointed out regulary, the US
already has more legal immigration the rest of the nations of the
world combined. What for? Not theoretical benefit, what real benefit
for the native citizenry? Racial/ethnic friction and wage depression?
You have to keep immigration numbers under strict control to avoid
creating that situation, to such an extent that a particular
racial/ethnic group do not begin to be felt as interlopers. Else your
own racial/ethnic ancestry will probably become identified with a side
in the dispute. You may not want to pick a side, you just want to live
your life, you probably don't want anything to do with the shittiness
of all that, but you are forced to. That's what you get out of
ignoring the law, that's what immigration law and naturalization is
there to prevent.

The abridged history of US Immigation always leaves out a few things:

- Periods of mass immigration have always been racially/ethnically
contentious, and usually fractured the society to a degree. Very
nasty. The Ellis Island styled Disney picture of it is a fabrication
for their 100% American grandchildren to chow down on.

- Newcomers by way a mass immigration episodes only assimulated _as a
people_ when the flow of their old countrymen was halted. That's the
key to understand historic US Immigration. It is human nature to take
the easiest path, which is colonization, not immigration in the
American meaning of the word. It's a lot of work, and pretty
unpleasant, to join the natives' kinship. It's something the average
person will only undertake if he has no other option, it involves a
sacrifice that is never quite finished for the immigrant himself. No
one volunteers for that, it doesn't just happen, you have to close off
the other options. Every American's ancestors who weren't English,
which most of us, had to go through that. Unless they could run right
out into a new farming region, which isn't the America of today.

 
"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
news:qrkm62d0hotp7pmjpcs6iju3hksvdp5jkm@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 04:21:48 GMT, "David Eduardo"
> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>>news:km8l62582brvarn53a6j83pek7spktjkm8@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
>>> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
>>> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
>>> opinion.]
>>
>>Considering he is a frequent guest and speaker at the Scientology
>>activities
>>in LA, I am suspect of anything he says today...
>>
>
> Well Mr Radio, you step in it there. You are remarkably uninformed,
> eager to cast aspersions upon good men on the basis of your own
> ignorance and poor charactor.
>
> I guess this means we really do have to take the certainties you type
> in for us in api as attempts to hornswoggle, eh?

I have a family member who was and is seriously involved with scientology
(up to the OT level) and has seen Pournelle at a variety of activities,
especially CCHR ones. That is enough for me. I even met him at one, and that
goes back to 1993, so his involvement is long.

On Wed, 17 May 2006 16:59:16 GMT, "David Eduardo"
<amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:

>
>"Graphic Queen" <pagan@pagan.com> wrote in message
>news:30cm625m8dtp0unvvdrc96iag3d2741j0l@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 04:21:48 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>>>news:km8l62582brvarn53a6j83pek7spktjkm8@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
>>>> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
>>>> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
>>>> opinion.]
>>>
>>>Considering he is a frequent guest and speaker at the Scientology
>>>activities
>>>in LA, I am suspect of anything he says today...
>>>
>> You don;t like what anyone has to say when it is against your illegals
>> that you love so much.
>
>I did not say that. I used to love Pournelle in Byte, and enjoyed his
>pre-90's books, but since he started showing up at CCHR and similar
>activities, I wonder. Just like I wonder about Tom Cruise.
>
Tom Cruise is just crazy!!!
--

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an
American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else,
for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.
But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...

There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also,
isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red
flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign
flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English
language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

~~Theodore Roosevelt, 1919

 
"Graphic Queen" <pagan@pagan.com> wrote in message
news:bsrm625innhn9j6qih87t94ov2iuh4bum9@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 16:59:16 GMT, "David Eduardo"
> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Graphic Queen" <pagan@pagan.com> wrote in message
>>news:30cm625m8dtp0unvvdrc96iag3d2741j0l@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 04:21:48 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>>> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:km8l62582brvarn53a6j83pek7spktjkm8@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
>>>>> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
>>>>> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
>>>>> opinion.]
>>>>
>>>>Considering he is a frequent guest and speaker at the Scientology
>>>>activities
>>>>in LA, I am suspect of anything he says today...
>>>>
>>> You don;t like what anyone has to say when it is against your illegals
>>> that you love so much.
>>
>>I did not say that. I used to love Pournelle in Byte, and enjoyed his
>>pre-90's books, but since he started showing up at CCHR and similar
>>activities, I wonder. Just like I wonder about Tom Cruise.
>>
> Tom Cruise is just crazy!!!

Gad! We agree again! This is way to often...

On Wed, 17 May 2006 19:02:33 GMT, "David Eduardo"
<amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:

>
>"Graphic Queen" <pagan@pagan.com> wrote in message
>news:bsrm625innhn9j6qih87t94ov2iuh4bum9@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 16:59:16 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Graphic Queen" <pagan@pagan.com> wrote in message
>>>news:30cm625m8dtp0unvvdrc96iag3d2741j0l@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 04:21:48 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>>>> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:km8l62582brvarn53a6j83pek7spktjkm8@4ax.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
>>>>>> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
>>>>>> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
>>>>>> opinion.]
>>>>>
>>>>>Considering he is a frequent guest and speaker at the Scientology
>>>>>activities
>>>>>in LA, I am suspect of anything he says today...
>>>>>
>>>> You don;t like what anyone has to say when it is against your illegals
>>>> that you love so much.
>>>
>>>I did not say that. I used to love Pournelle in Byte, and enjoyed his
>>>pre-90's books, but since he started showing up at CCHR and similar
>>>activities, I wonder. Just like I wonder about Tom Cruise.
>>>
>> Tom Cruise is just crazy!!!
>
>Gad! We agree again! This is way to often...
>
I don't have a problem with anyone believing what they want to but Tom
goes on about things he knows nothing about when it comes to medicine
and such.
--

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an
American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else,
for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.
But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...

There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also,
isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red
flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign
flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English
language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

~~Theodore Roosevelt, 1919

On Wed, 17 May 2006 18:26:15 GMT, "David Eduardo"
<amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:

>
>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>news:qrkm62d0hotp7pmjpcs6iju3hksvdp5jkm@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 04:21:48 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>>>news:km8l62582brvarn53a6j83pek7spktjkm8@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
>>>> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
>>>> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
>>>> opinion.]
>>>
>>>Considering he is a frequent guest and speaker at the Scientology
>>>activities
>>>in LA, I am suspect of anything he says today...
>>>
>>
>> Well Mr Radio, you step in it there. You are remarkably uninformed,
>> eager to cast aspersions upon good men on the basis of your own
>> ignorance and poor charactor.
>>
>> I guess this means we really do have to take the certainties you type
>> in for us in api as attempts to hornswoggle, eh?
>
>I have a family member who was and is seriously involved with scientology
>(up to the OT level) and has seen Pournelle at a variety of activities,
>especially CCHR ones. That is enough for me. I even met him at one, and that
>goes back to 1993, so his involvement is long.
>

That is absurd. Your flakey family member probably wants to sandbag
credibility for his "Church" via a connection that doesn't actually
exist. Pournelle is a judge at these Writers events that Hubbard
funded as a memorial foundation. Therefore he is one of us and the
story grows. Beep Beep.

A long time ago I used to correspond and played a very meager part in
his discussion circles. I know how he thinks and what kind of fellow
he is, so much as you can know. You are as likely to find him
believing something of that nature as you are to find me running an
underground railroad for mojados. Being a Scientologist involves
sacrificing your reason and believing a _ludicrous_ invention of L Ron
Hubbard concerning the souls of Space Aliens. Pournelle is unusually
sane, and keeps the most brilliant stable of friends of anyone I've
known. He is not capable of adopting ludicrity of that nature, he just
isn't that kind of person. He is generous about the dianetics thing
for people who practice their psychoanalysis methods, breaks it down
to its roots in 19th century psychiatry, which is all it actually is.
He is somewhat generous and tolerant about that, and that's it.

You, on the other hand, are apparently the kind of ahole who feels
need to besmirch better men.

 
"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
news:8urm62dl722dj0dibdbdfiilkqt0r39m8p@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 18:26:15 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>>
>>I have a family member who was and is seriously involved with scientology
>>(up to the OT level) and has seen Pournelle at a variety of activities,
>>especially CCHR ones. That is enough for me. I even met him at one, and
>>that
>>goes back to 1993, so his involvement is long.
>>
>
> That is absurd. Your flakey family member probably wants to sandbag
> credibility for his "Church" via a connection that doesn't actually
> exist. Pournelle is a judge at these Writers events that Hubbard
> funded as a memorial foundation. Therefore he is one of us and the
> story grows. Beep Beep.

Hubbard has been dead for quite a while. Were Pournelle to have any affinity
for Hubbard, it would have been in life.

The "Hubbard" events for writers take place at Scientology buildings, mostly
the CCHR center in Hollywood. They are Scientology events, not "Hubbard"
events.
>
> A long time ago I used to correspond and played a very meager part in
> his discussion circles. I know how he thinks and what kind of fellow
> he is, so much as you can know.

Actually, I was in a group on CIS back in the 80's that included not just
Pournelle but Jack Chalker as well. I have chatted many times with both, and
actually have one of the Well series signed by Chalker who spontaneously
sent it to me.

> You are as likely to find him
> believing something of that nature as you are to find me running an
> underground railroad for mojados. Being a Scientologist involves
> sacrificing your reason and believing a _ludicrous_ invention of L Ron
> Hubbard concerning the souls of Space Aliens. Pournelle is unusually
> sane, and keeps the most brilliant stable of friends of anyone I've
> known. He is not capable of adopting ludicrity of that nature, he just
> isn't that kind of person. He is generous about the dianetics thing
> for people who practice their psychoanalysis methods, breaks it down
> to its roots in 19th century psychiatry, which is all it actually is.
> He is somewhat generous and tolerant about that, and that's it.

Then why does he make a point of attending Scientology events? Unless I had
an affinity towards Islam, I would not go to a mosque.

On Wed, 17 May 2006 19:41:59 GMT, "David Eduardo"
<amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:

>
>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>news:8urm62dl722dj0dibdbdfiilkqt0r39m8p@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 18:26:15 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>>>
>>>I have a family member who was and is seriously involved with scientology
>>>(up to the OT level) and has seen Pournelle at a variety of activities,
>>>especially CCHR ones. That is enough for me. I even met him at one, and
>>>that
>>>goes back to 1993, so his involvement is long.
>>>
>>
>> That is absurd. Your flakey family member probably wants to sandbag
>> credibility for his "Church" via a connection that doesn't actually
>> exist. Pournelle is a judge at these Writers events that Hubbard
>> funded as a memorial foundation. Therefore he is one of us and the
>> story grows. Beep Beep.
>
>Hubbard has been dead for quite a while. Were Pournelle to have any affinity
>for Hubbard, it would have been in life.

Has to do with... what?

>
>The "Hubbard" events for writers take place at Scientology buildings, mostly
>the CCHR center in Hollywood. They are Scientology events, not "Hubbard"
>events.

Excuse me, but there are apparently a good number of famed scifi
writers who attend and judge these Writers Of The Future events. Are
you claiming that they are all Scientologists? Are you claiming that
any of them are?

>>
>> A long time ago I used to correspond and played a very meager part in
>> his discussion circles. I know how he thinks and what kind of fellow
>> he is, so much as you can know.
>
>Actually, I was in a group on CIS back in the 80's that included not just
>Pournelle but Jack Chalker as well. I have chatted many times with both, and
>actually have one of the Well series signed by Chalker who spontaneously
>sent it to me.

CIS, great. That wasn't where he really hung out much back then as I
remember, but great. Are you claiming that Jerry, by any measure of
people who know him, is capable of being a flake of that sort? Of
adopting a ludicrous Space Alien religion, one invented by a fellow
scifi writer, a writer who admitted to all his scfi writer friends
that he was inventing it because that was a way to get rich?

>
>> You are as likely to find him
>> believing something of that nature as you are to find me running an
>> underground railroad for mojados. Being a Scientologist involves
>> sacrificing your reason and believing a _ludicrous_ invention of L Ron
>> Hubbard concerning the souls of Space Aliens. Pournelle is unusually
>> sane, and keeps the most brilliant stable of friends of anyone I've
>> known. He is not capable of adopting ludicrity of that nature, he just
>> isn't that kind of person. He is generous about the dianetics thing
>> for people who practice their psychoanalysis methods, breaks it down
>> to its roots in 19th century psychiatry, which is all it actually is.
>> He is somewhat generous and tolerant about that, and that's it.
>
>Then why does he make a point of attending Scientology events? Unless I had
>an affinity towards Islam, I would not go to a mosque.
>

He doesn't, he goes to Writers of the Future events.

You really are a worthless screwball, aren't you David? Tired of
argueing with clueless women I see.

 
"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
news:pfvm6296dn4m5jqv17ug4uhdltveiv93ii@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 19:41:59 GMT, "David Eduardo"
> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>
>>The "Hubbard" events for writers take place at Scientology buildings,
>>mostly
>>the CCHR center in Hollywood. They are Scientology events, not "Hubbard"
>>events.
>
> Excuse me, but there are apparently a good number of famed scifi
> writers who attend and judge these Writers Of The Future events. Are
> you claiming that they are all Scientologists? Are you claiming that
> any of them are?

They are certaainly sympathetic to Scientology or they would not be in a
Scientology building, introduced by Scientologists and where the most
available work of fiction is Dianetics, not Dune.
>>
>>Then why does he make a point of attending Scientology events? Unless I
>>had
>>an affinity towards Islam, I would not go to a mosque.
>>
>
> He doesn't, he goes to Writers of the Future events.

Same thing. Run by the CoS, at a CoS building, full of CoS officials, right
up to Miscavage. That is like saying that fish don't swim in the ocean. The
Writers of the Future is another CoS scam like CCHR that pretends to be
separate from Sceintology but is run, funded and directed by the CoS.

On Wed, 17 May 2006 21:04:28 GMT, "David Eduardo"
<amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:

>
>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>news:pfvm6296dn4m5jqv17ug4uhdltveiv93ii@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 19:41:59 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>The "Hubbard" events for writers take place at Scientology buildings,
>>>mostly
>>>the CCHR center in Hollywood. They are Scientology events, not "Hubbard"
>>>events.
>>
>> Excuse me, but there are apparently a good number of famed scifi
>> writers who attend and judge these Writers Of The Future events. Are
>> you claiming that they are all Scientologists? Are you claiming that
>> any of them are?
>
>They are certaainly sympathetic to Scientology or they would not be in a
>Scientology building, introduced by Scientologists and where the most
>available work of fiction is Dianetics, not Dune.

Obviously you don't know a thing about these writers or what they are
sympathetic to, or who introduces them, or what books are hawked
there, if any. You don't know a thing about it, you don't go to their
events.

Presumably they would be in a building that this foundation has free
use of. And they could probably care less, so long as they don't
interfere with their event.

>>>
>>>Then why does he make a point of attending Scientology events? Unless I
>>>had
>>>an affinity towards Islam, I would not go to a mosque.
>>>
>>
>> He doesn't, he goes to Writers of the Future events.
>
>Same thing. Run by the CoS, at a CoS building, full of CoS officials, right
>up to Miscavage. That is like saying that fish don't swim in the ocean. The
>Writers of the Future is another CoS scam like CCHR that pretends to be
>separate from Sceintology but is run, funded and directed by the CoS.

Sure, Mr McCarthy.

What's wrong David, you're bright enough to realize that your amigos
are hanging themselves on the short-term installment plan? I'd like to
send them each a tamale.

Can't wait for the elections.

Or the looks when this current legislation is stopped at the House
door - If you're going to pull the gun to shoot someone whose trust
you required, you'd better be completely sure of your aim.

Alcibiades wrote:
> [Jerry Pournelle is one of the half-dozen smartest men I've ever
> spoken with, and he combines it with real wisdom, routinely. 15 years
> ago he was very non-commital, now he seems to have an unmistakable
> opinion.]
>
> http://www.jerrypournelle.com/view/view414.html#Tuesday
>
> Reflections on Immigration:
>
> Under currently proposed legislation, we will import up to 100 million
> -- that's 10^8 people -- legally and legalized illegals -- in twenty
> years or so. I do not believe that the Melting Pot can deal with that
> dilution to the American character.
>
> In fact I do not believe that we can assimilate the number of illegal
> immigrants we already have. The legal immigration program already
> admits too many people at the bottom end of society if you count
> families: elders imported to be on Social Security because the Old
> Country doesn't have decent pensions. And so forth. Add to that the
> illegal immigrants and the very character of the American Experiment
> in Self Government is at stake.
>
> Democracy is a dangerous form of government. There never was a
> democracy that did not commit suicide. The Framers opted for a federal
> republic, a Nation of States, an experiment in ordered liberty with
> variants. That has endured for a long time. It was transformed into a
> more unitary state by the Civil War, but even that did not destroy the
> fundamental character of these United States. I know there are those
> who argue that the Civil War ended the American experiment; I remind
> them that despair is a sin, and that in fact as late as 1938
> Washington, DC was a small town in Maryland, "Don't make a Federal
> Case of this" was a meaningful expression, the FBI office in a major
> city might have half a dozen Agents and as many clerical staff, and so
> forth.
>
> Since the Civil War the US went from Federal Republic to National
> Democracy, but it did so slowly, and until Earl Warren and his
> Imperial Judiciary it ran up against limits. Now we are going further
> down that axis toward a French-style Centralized Bureaucratic Rule. We
> are becoming a national democracy.
>
> There never was a democracy that did not commit suicide.
>
> But even those who have long advocated democracy have always known
> that a democracy is not a form of government compatible with cultural
> and linguistic diversity. The Swiss Exception is instructive:
> Switzerland is a democracy, and it is diverse in both language and
> confession -- and it is not unitary. Few Swiss can name their
> President although most can tell you the name of the Canton and
> Commune officials relevant to their lives. A national democracy cannot
> endure as a culturally diverse society with cultural, linguistic, and
> religious diversities. It cannot. Ours will not.
>
> The American Melting Pot model of assimilation to a single language,
> and a wide-based Judao-Christian ethical and religious culture, might
> be able to endure nationalization. Might. That would be an interesting
> experiment. But it is 100% certain that the Melting Pot cannot handle
> great dilution, and that it takes time for it to work. Adding tens of
> millions of illegals plus larger numbers of legal immigrants will
> destroy the model and force our national democracy into the typical
> defects of a large national democracy, and thus to extinction. This is
> about as certain as anything we know about history.
>
> Apparently no one in Washington understands this.
>
> If they did, they would close the borders NOW, not in 2008.
>
> As to how, it's simple: call it 2000 miles of border. At $1 million
> per mile that is $2 billion/year, a drop in the Budget. Hand that
> money on a per/mile basis to each border county sheriff, with
> provision that it must be spent on border control -- apprehension and
> confinement. Now hand every border city $20 million a year for the
> same purposes. Hand each Border State $50 million a year, again solely
> for border enforcement. The whole program will cost less than the
> illegals cost us now.
>
> And yes, there are details to be worked out, including rewards for
> performance and penalties for non-performance, and I took the numbers
> out of the top of my head; but it would work a lot better than sending
> 6,000 Guardsmen down to the border for TWO WEEK SHIFTS. The present
> plan will do nothing. It won't even LOOK as if it is doing something,
> which is its only purpose anyway.
>
> Close the border now. Deport all illegals who come to the attention of
> the police courts. Insist that any legalization program includes
> instruction in English, Civics, American History, and such, and have a
> zero tolerance policy regarding crime including DUI, speeding tickets,
> driving without a license, drunk and disorderly... IN other words,
> deport those who volunteer for deportation. And hope that we can
> assimilate the rest. And do that NOW.
>
> Apparently no one in Washington understands what is at stake.
>
> Daily we sow the wind.
> ----------------------

Bravo, Pournelle!

Deborah

 
"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
news:8p7n629il3l22n7nbm920cla9hp7s1bi0n@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 21:04:28 GMT, "David Eduardo"
> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>>news:pfvm6296dn4m5jqv17ug4uhdltveiv93ii@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 19:41:59 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>>> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>The "Hubbard" events for writers take place at Scientology buildings,
>>>>mostly
>>>>the CCHR center in Hollywood. They are Scientology events, not "Hubbard"
>>>>events.
>>>
>>> Excuse me, but there are apparently a good number of famed scifi
>>> writers who attend and judge these Writers Of The Future events. Are
>>> you claiming that they are all Scientologists? Are you claiming that
>>> any of them are?
>>
>>They are certaainly sympathetic to Scientology or they would not be in a
>>Scientology building, introduced by Scientologists and where the most
>>available work of fiction is Dianetics, not Dune.
>
> Obviously you don't know a thing about these writers or what they are
> sympathetic to, or who introduces them, or what books are hawked
> there, if any. You don't know a thing about it, you don't go to their
> events.

I actually went to two of them as a favor, and met Pournelle at the first,
in, I believe, 1993. It was at the CCHR in Hollywood. It was packed with CoS
folks.
>
> Presumably they would be in a building that this foundation has free
> use of. And they could probably care less, so long as they don't
> interfere with their event.

The Scientologists conduct the events. I said that at one, even David
Miscavage was in attendance. SF writers were the minority.

On Wed, 17 May 2006 22:56:08 GMT, "David Eduardo"
<amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:

>
>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>news:8p7n629il3l22n7nbm920cla9hp7s1bi0n@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 21:04:28 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
>>>news:pfvm6296dn4m5jqv17ug4uhdltveiv93ii@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 19:41:59 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>>>> <amdavid@pacbell.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>The "Hubbard" events for writers take place at Scientology buildings,
>>>>>mostly
>>>>>the CCHR center in Hollywood. They are Scientology events, not "Hubbard"
>>>>>events.
>>>>
>>>> Excuse me, but there are apparently a good number of famed scifi
>>>> writers who attend and judge these Writers Of The Future events. Are
>>>> you claiming that they are all Scientologists? Are you claiming that
>>>> any of them are?
>>>
>>>They are certaainly sympathetic to Scientology or they would not be in a
>>>Scientology building, introduced by Scientologists and where the most
>>>available work of fiction is Dianetics, not Dune.
>>
>> Obviously you don't know a thing about these writers or what they are
>> sympathetic to, or who introduces them, or what books are hawked
>> there, if any. You don't know a thing about it, you don't go to their
>> events.
>
>I actually went to two of them as a favor, and met Pournelle at the first,
>in, I believe, 1993. It was at the CCHR in Hollywood. It was packed with CoS
>folks.
>>
>> Presumably they would be in a building that this foundation has free
>> use of. And they could probably care less, so long as they don't
>> interfere with their event.
>
>The Scientologists conduct the events. I said that at one, even David
>Miscavage was in attendance. SF writers were the minority.
>

Yeah. And we should buy into your veracity there because... you follow
it with laughable McCarthyesque rants?

In any case he is not a Scientologist, none of them are
Scientologists, that would be like you paying dues to the Howard Stern
Fanclub, and I already posted his own words on the matter.

Face it you old jackass, we are going to change the picture up there
and then we're going to change the picture out here, people are really
coming on board now.

 
"Alcibiades" <still-alcibiades@postamerica.net> wrote in message
news:7gcn62pf82l164hf5acu2410uh5i1a9ip0@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 22:56:08 GMT, "David Eduardo"
>>
>>The Scientologists conduct the events. I said that at one, even David
>>Miscavage was in attendance. SF writers were the minority.
>>
>
> Yeah. And we should buy into your veracity there because... you follow
> it with laughable McCarthyesque rants?

This is no more complicated that the old, "if it walks like a duck and talks
like a duck..." philosophy.

> In any case he is not a Scientologist, none of them are
> Scientologists, that would be like you paying dues to the Howard Stern
> Fanclub, and I already posted his own words on the matter.
>
> Face it you old jackass, we are going to change the picture up there
> and then we're going to change the picture out here, people are really
> coming on board now.

Coming from someone who just today said Jeff Foxworthy did not appeal to
rednecks, I can sincerely say, "I doubt it."

 
MURS radios wrote:
> Just yesterday in rec.arts.sf.written, I had brought up that no writers
> in the SciFi community were addressing the issue of runaway
> immigration/communism, but that there are MANY recent stories by
> left-leaning authors that
> tend to paint the future as being controlled by "evil" conservatives -
> here are just a few:
>
> Steele's COYOTE trilogy

...The sequel of which, at least from the excerpts I read, has the same
future now controlled by evil _socialists_.

The ship names from there can probably be added to the "Ships of SF"
thread.

> Steele's COYOTE trilogy

In that story, when the very technologically-advanced humans come from
Earth to the new planet, they bring incredible technology and
ressources...yet end up displacing the locals in their ONE town (a few
hundred people at best) and making sure that everyone lives in
martially-enforced poverty. The mission commander's obsession with the
original settlers bordered on the insane in that no sane commander
would willfuly generate such pain where none is needed. She could have
settled a valley a few kilometers away and raised a high-tech town in
weeks, with water, electricity and heating, uplink to her ship's
libraries, and airstrip for the shuttles. But NOoooo, she had to stick
to the original settlers and use guns.

That was a disgusting and unrealistic character and situation, which
made me despise Steele for it. I could imagine a Tsar doing that to a
small siberain community, for the show of power and because its the
only town until he reaches his destination, but this is Coyote, with
millions of square miles of land area. What she wants is her people as
clear superiors in all ways, so that she can feel superior and in
control...like back on Earth. Ok, we get it, she's evil. Earth has
become evil. Gotcha. Now explain how this is realistic? Just nuke the
place and settle next door, or gas it one night and put everyone in
newly-built concrete prison-bunkers so she can keep them alive and yet
have absolute control over them...ANYTHING but that stupid move.

/end of long overdue rent :)