1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 17 Sep 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 517       Contents:3 Re: HP-UX will not be ported to Alpha (no surprise)  RE: memory channel Re: memory channel Re: memory channel Re: memory channel Re: memory channel' On Board Adaptec Controller boot VMS7.3  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center 9 Re: Somehow, D. Cutler (was Re: HP-UX will not be ported)  Tan Without The Sun , The New Yorker's view of the proposed merger, Re: What RAM does a VAXstation 4000 VLC use?, Re: What RAM does a VAXstation 4000 VLC use?, Re: What RAM does a VAXstation 4000 VLC use?, Re: What RAM does a VAXstation 4000 VLC use? Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center$ Re: WSJ reporting HP will buy Compaq$ Re: WSJ reporting HP will buy Compaq  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 15:53:01 -0700 & From: name99@mac.com (Maynard Handley)< Subject: Re: HP-UX will not be ported to Alpha (no surprise)7 Message-ID: <name99-1609011553010001@handma2.apple.com>   E In article <9nsurh$mit$15@bob.news.rcn.net>, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:   + > In article <3BA11D7F.5040104@compaq.com>, 0 >    John Reagan <john.reagan@compaq.com> wrote: > >Bill Todd wrote:  > >  > >>  L > >> And DEC's first PL/1 compiler, I think (the back-end of which was then  > used, > >> for one or more other languages, IIRC). > >>   > > A > >The VCG is/was used by VAX PL/1, VAX Ada, VAX C, and VAX SCAN.  > > K > >By the way, don't be fooled into thinking that Cutler, et al. wrote the  G > >VCG from scratch.  They didn't.  It was licensed from other company.  > ? > And what was Cutler's position.  Cost center manager, product @ > mangager, architect?  The work he did would be dictated by hisB > position in the heirarchy.  Look, managers had a function within> > a development cycle, too; coding just wasn't part of the job- > description nor would there have been time.   I When Peter Hoddie was at Apple at the helm of QuickTime, his position was I essentially whatever he felt like, and he was sufficiently respected (and J good at all these roles) that he got away with this. Peter wrote code, didJ architecture, did product and marketing planning, gave public demos and so on. L I see no reason why Dave Cutler could not have played the same role wrt VMS.   Maynard    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 13:33:10 -0500 0 From: arturo saavedra <arturo.saavedra@wcom.com> Subject: RE: memory channel C Message-ID: <MOEAJKGGEIMGCCPEPJBHGEPGFIAA.arturo.saavedra@wcom.com>   L They are no longer supported.. we have tested a beta fix.. which did not fixG the issue.. so we are hopeful that compaq is close to a new driver that  we'll try out shortly.       -----Original Message-----4 From: Tom Simpson [mailto:simpsont@xxx.mediaone.net]( Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 8:44 AM To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  Subject: Re: memory channel     L We had many unexplained system crashes on our 2 node ES40 cluster, about oneE a month.  The crash dump analysis always seemed to indicate something J related to memory channel operations, but nothing solid.  The hardware wasK replaced, still problems.  It got to the point that management was ready to K throw Compaq out and find another hardware vendor.  Finally Compaq admitted H that there were other customers with similar configurations have similarL problems.  They purchased and installed a memory channel hub and we have not had a crash since last March.   I Although I have not checked, I would expect that "hubless" configurations I are no longer on the supported configuration list (at least for OpenVMS).    Regards, Tom   7 "Bart Zorn" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl> wrote in message 5 news:3ba3afe6$0$65636$e4fe514c@newszilla.xs4all.nl... < > "Tom Simpson" <simpsont@xxx.mediaone.net> wrote in messageB > news:VXLo7.7020$na5.1625389@typhoon.jacksonville.mediaone.net...I > > I hope your memory channel configuration includes a hub...  Direct MC  > > connection > > is a problem.  > >  > > Regards, > > Tom  > L > Could you explain a little bit more? It's the first time that I have heard > of it! >  > Bart Zorn  >  >  >    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 20:29:56 GMT ! From: jon@cmkrnl.net (Jon Morgan)  Subject: Re: memory channel * Message-ID: <3ba50b97.4366819@130.133.1.4>  B On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 13:11:33 GMT, "john nixon" <jnixon@cfl.rr.com> wrote:@ >But back to the memory channel.  Any advice on how to make MCA0
 >"available"?   A We currently have a pair of WildFires that are connected together A through MC in virtual hub mode and have all sorts of problems. It B never has caused a system crash, however, just problems on booting: (MC0 kept on causing an MCINCONSTATE BUGCHECK on the node D rebooting, and requires a console level init to fix). We also get a @ lot of errors on the PM devices that don't (apparently) seem to B cause many problems. Engineering produced a new MC driver that was@ supposed to fix the problem, but it still reports errors and theC BUGCHECK is still there. As mentioned in other responses, going to  7 a MC hub is seen to be one way to resolve these errors.   C I know it doesn't really help with your situation, but at least you & are not the only one with MC problems.   		-jon.    --  
 jon morgan   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 22:15:45 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>  Subject: Re: memory channel * Message-ID: <3BA51680.6626BA22@virgin.net>   Jon Morgan wrote:   E > I know it doesn't really help with your situation, but at least you ( > are not the only one with MC problems. > @ > This problem has been reported for months without a fix. It isE > scandalous that Compaq have neither fixed it or provided a free hub C > upgrade to all hubless MC sites. DEC would have done so I'm sure.  > What's the matter?   This is Sun's way of working?    >    >               -jon.  >  > -- > jon morgan   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 22:34:55 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>  Subject: Re: memory channel * Message-ID: <3BA51AFE.7F74CEBD@virgin.net>   Alan Greig wrote:   @ > This problem has been reported for months without a fix. It isE > scandalous that Compaq have neither fixed it or provided a free hub C > upgrade to all hubless MC sites. DEC would have done so I'm sure.  > What's the matter? >   I Hmm, I wrote the above para but somehow the attribution got screwed up in  the original posting.      >  > This is Sun's way of working?  >  > >  >  > >               -jon.  > >  > > -- > > jon morgan >  > -- > Alan Greig   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 00:03:41 GMT & From: "john nixon" <jnixon@cfl.rr.com> Subject: Re: memory channel > Message-ID: <x5bp7.159396$aZ.27635421@typhoon.tampabay.rr.com>  H Thanks to all who responded.  Because of this board,  I now understand aK little more than I did before, and I also have some ammunition to defend my G self with.  Our field engineer told our management that I spent several K thousand dollars more than I should have.  His reasoning was that with only L two memory-channel capable machines, I should have gone to a hubless config.K My response is that not only do we plan to add a third MC machine soon, and I now we won't have to modify existing production equipment, but I had also L heard about the problem with hubless systems on C.O.V before and I wanted to5 avoid those problems.  That is what VMS is all about.   H VMS has been very very good to me for a long time now.  Hopefully, CarlyF will see the light and promote VMS as well as they have promoted theirJ printers.  (I also wish for world peace, so maybe I will be 1 for 2.  I am always the optimist).   L Thanks to all,  (even Bill who doesn't even know me, yet calls me stupid and everything I say "horseshit").C And thanks to Glenn Everhart who disagreed in a private e-mail with I something I said, but he said it politely and rationally, and made sense.      "    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 17:11:42 -0400 0 From: "Island Computers" <dbturner@islandco.com>0 Subject: On Board Adaptec Controller boot VMS7.3/ Message-ID: <tqa4t7rf4gar4a@news.supernews.com>   # I was trying to figure this one out   I Was messing around with a VMS7.3 S ALpha DS20e on Friday, and thought for H the hell of it I would take out the KZPCA Ultra2 Controller and plug the7 disks into the onboard Ultra1 Adaptec (7895) controller    Lo and behold it booted???  % When did support for this happen ????    -- David Turner   We sell Alpha systems & parts  http://www.islandco.com  sales@islandco.com Island Computers US Corp.  2700 Gregory Street  Savannah GA 31404  Tel: 912 447 6622  Fax: 912 201 0096  ICQ#: 130698221    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 14:16:26 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> ( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center( Message-ID: <9o2q77$6rb$1@pyrite.mv.net>  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3BA4DFBE.D6C86E39@fsi.net...  > Israel Raj T wrote: 
 > > [snip]F > > ... the 0.5 million children who have died in Iraq due to American5 > > sanctions depriving them of food and medications,  >  > Corrections: > ! > 1. UN sanctions, not "American"   H American influence appears to be the only reason they're still in place.   > G > 2. The sole blame for this lies with the recalcitrant despot dictator J > who holds his own ambitions higher than the lives of those he is trusted > to govern.  H Any credit or blame for the effects of the sanctions lies with those whoH impose them.  We may have had good reasons originally for believing thatL imposing them would result in a change in Iraq's government.  We were proved? wrong long ago, and any reason for continuing them disappeared.    > H > Saddam knows how to lift the sanctions - but he never will. The deathsH > and plight of his people weigh on his shoulders alone - no one else's.  L That makes about as much sense as saying that the blame for Tuesday's attackK falls on the shoulders of U.S. leaders for not being more responsive to the  demands of the outside world.   H We're not punishing Saddam, we're punishing most severely precisely thatK segment of the Iraqi people with the least ability to influence (or change) K their leadership.  However much sense it may seemed to have made initially,  it's clearly wrong now.    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 14:50:14 -0400 + From: "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> ( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center+ Message-ID: <9o2s9s$eft$1@bob.news.rcn.net>   2 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message" news:9o2q77$6rb$1@pyrite.mv.net... > > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message# > news:3BA4DFBE.D6C86E39@fsi.net...  > > Israel Raj T wrote:  > > > [snip]H > > > ... the 0.5 million children who have died in Iraq due to American7 > > > sanctions depriving them of food and medications,  > >  > > Corrections: > > # > > 1. UN sanctions, not "American"  > J > American influence appears to be the only reason they're still in place.  L Have the US vetoed any Security Council votes on this issue? Have there been any? --
 John Saunders  jws@ma.ultranet.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 15:00:08 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> ( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center' Message-ID: <3BA504C8.43BDC5D2@fsi.net>    Bill Todd wrote: > > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message# > news:3BA4DFBE.D6C86E39@fsi.net...  > > Israel Raj T wrote:  > > > [snip]H > > > ... the 0.5 million children who have died in Iraq due to American7 > > > sanctions depriving them of food and medications,  > >  > > Corrections: > > # > > 1. UN sanctions, not "American"  > J > American influence appears to be the only reason they're still in place. >  > > I > > 2. The sole blame for this lies with the recalcitrant despot dictator L > > who holds his own ambitions higher than the lives of those he is trusted > > to govern. > J > Any credit or blame for the effects of the sanctions lies with those who > impose them.    G By that logic, the victim is to blame for the punishment imposed in any G crime where the perp.'s are prosecuted and convicted. Sorry - don't buy  it.   E In Iraq's case, Saddam alone is to blame for the imposition of the UN F sanctions as well as their effects on his people, since he has neitherF abdicated nor capitulated to UN demands. The people can choose to riseD up against him if they feel contrary to the way he does, but insteadF have chosen to endure their leader's punishment and share it with him.A Therefore, one can only assume either or both of two things: they D genuinely agree with him, or have been forced to submit to his will.  < > We may have had good reasons originally for believing thatN > imposing them would result in a change in Iraq's government.  We were provedA > wrong long ago, and any reason for continuing them disappeared.   @ When did the reasons disappear? Has Saddam abdicated? Has SaddamH capitulated to UN demands? If the answer to either is "no", then I would? say that the "reason for continuing them" remains undiminished.    > > J > > Saddam knows how to lift the sanctions - but he never will. The deathsJ > > and plight of his people weigh on his shoulders alone - no one else's. > N > That makes about as much sense as saying that the blame for Tuesday's attackM > falls on the shoulders of U.S. leaders for not being more responsive to the  > demands of the outside world.   G ...but it isn't that what you've been proposing? ...that we are somehow E to blame for not "being more responsive to the demands of the outside  world"?    J > We're not punishing Saddam, we're punishing most severely precisely thatM > segment of the Iraqi people with the least ability to influence (or change)  > their leadership.   > That is the fault of one man, and one man only. By refusing toE capitulate, and by inciting his people against the UN, Saddam remains H defiant - and the sanctions remain. Cause -> effect. So simple, even *I*6 can understand it! ...and that's pretty damned simple!  D The members of the UN are not now, never have been and never will beF responsible for Saddam's incursions into Kuwait. The members of the UNB are not now, never have been and never will be responsible for theC effects of sanctions imposed on Iraq as a result of such aggression 9 against a neighbor country which posed no threat to Iraq.   E I will remain intractable on those points, so best not to pursue them  further.  : > However much sense it may seemed to have made initially, > it's clearly wrong now.   G Why is it "clearly wrong"? How can we back down now without encouraging F others to commit crimes against humanity similar to those which caused/ the sanctions to be imposed in the first place?   H Backing down would be both clearly and inarguably wrong. Wrong for Iraq,F wrong for the member nations of the UN, wrong for the peaceful nationsG of the civilized world who might subsequently find themselves victim of H a similar (or the same) tyrant who attacks knowing he/she can do so with near-total impunity.  ? ...IMHO, YMMV considerably, possibly (probably) to the point of  diametric opposition.    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 22:12:45 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> ( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center* Message-ID: <3BA515CD.E9EB57A4@virgin.net>   "David J. Dachtera" wrote:  > That is the fault of one man, and one man only. By refusing to  G > capitulate, and by inciting his people against the UN, Saddam remains J > defiant - and the sanctions remain. Cause -> effect. So simple, even *I*8 > can understand it! ...and that's pretty damned simple! >t  N On one level your analysis is correct but this doesn't just play out on such aP simplistic planning scenario. If it is "so simple even I can understand it" then red flags should be going up.0  O I believe this is playing out on levels way beyond public conception right now.o   >lG > I will remain intractable on those points, so best not to pursue them 
 > further. >e  - Classic statement of a personality in denial.3    J > Backing down would be both clearly and inarguably wrong. Wrong for Iraq,H > wrong for the member nations of the UN, wrong for the peaceful nations >7  M Well don't back down. Find another way. "There are always alternatives" as Mrn Spock once told me.u    I > of the civilized world who might subsequently find themselves victim ofoJ > a similar (or the same) tyrant who attacks knowing he/she can do so with > near-total impunity. >2  P The only person on this planet who can do anything with almost total impunity is3 the US president. Or that was true until last week..  M Stop this madness now before it is too late. "Now is not the time to turn theiJ other cheek". It says something when even government officials quote Jesus unapprovingly.  # For all our sakes find another way.e   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 19:26:18 -0400a+ From: "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com>s( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center+ Message-ID: <9o3cfi$kps$1@bob.news.rcn.net>p  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3BA504C8.43BDC5D2@fsi.net...e. > How can we back down now without encouragingH > others to commit crimes against humanity similar to those which caused1 > the sanctions to be imposed in the first place?o  L Well, actually David, we could blame Iraq for funding the WTC attack, finishJ the job of mopping it up and disposing of its current government, and then* we could drop the sanctions. Works for me. --
 John Saundersn jws@ma.ultranet.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 19:19:18 -0500t1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>r( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center' Message-ID: <3BA54186.308629A9@fsi.net>    Alan Greig wrote:  >  > "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > @ > That is the fault of one man, and one man only. By refusing to > I > > capitulate, and by inciting his people against the UN, Saddam remainstL > > defiant - and the sanctions remain. Cause -> effect. So simple, even *I*: > > can understand it! ...and that's pretty damned simple! > >e > P > On one level your analysis is correct but this doesn't just play out on such aR > simplistic planning scenario. If it is "so simple even I can understand it" then > red flags should be going up.d  D How so? My experience shows that of something is "that complicated",F it's probably been blown out of proportion. Sonmetimes we study things: so deeply that the obvious escapes us. Case in point: WTC.  sQ > I believe this is playing out on levels way beyond public conception right now.   E Conception? I'm sure. Comprehension? Don't underestimate the American G people. The terrorists did - and the consequences of that will frightenc2 even those charged to dispense those consequences.    > >rI > > I will remain intractable on those points, so best not to pursue theme > > further. > >S > / > Classic statement of a personality in denial.    Would you care to elaborate?  D So far, the discussion here has been mostly reasonable and civil, ifH somewhat agitated. Let's try to maintain both reason and civility, shallF we? (Hint: My inital response to your comment was severe anger - I had> dinner, ran a few errands and finished the laundry before even attempting to respond.)m   --   David J. Dachtera8 dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/t   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 20:49:13 -0500 + From: Phil Mendelsohn <mend0070@tc.umn.edu>n( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade CenterH Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.20.0109162047510.14236-100000@garnet.tc.umn.edu>  ) On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, John Saunders wrote:n  > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message# > news:3BA504C8.43BDC5D2@fsi.net...o0 > > How can we back down now without encouragingJ > > others to commit crimes against humanity similar to those which caused3 > > the sanctions to be imposed in the first place?n > N > Well, actually David, we could blame Iraq for funding the WTC attack, finishL > the job of mopping it up and disposing of its current government, and then, > we could drop the sanctions. Works for me.  C That could get messy, when it is shown that the U.S. originally setlI Hussein up in business in the first place, sometime around the depositione of the Shah of Iran.   -- o< I liked HP before computers, and at one time I liked Compaq,7 but I liked DEC better than HP and Compaq put together.t   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 21:50:27 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>i( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center' Message-ID: <3BA564F3.24BA5758@fsi.net>    Phil Mendelsohn wrote: > + > On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, John Saunders wrote:  > @ > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message% > > news:3BA504C8.43BDC5D2@fsi.net...t2 > > > How can we back down now without encouragingL > > > others to commit crimes against humanity similar to those which caused5 > > > the sanctions to be imposed in the first place?  > >lP > > Well, actually David, we could blame Iraq for funding the WTC attack, finishN > > the job of mopping it up and disposing of its current government, and then. > > we could drop the sanctions. Works for me. > E > That could get messy, when it is shown that the U.S. originally settK > Hussein up in business in the first place, sometime around the deposition  > of the Shah of Iran.  D At that time, world events was about as far from me as married life.% Now, I'm in the thick of both of 'em.t  F Knowing that now sort of explains his recalcitrant obstinance, but not his cruelty.   -- r David J. Dachterah dba DJE Systemsn http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/a   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 03:55:14 GMTn' From: smw@shell3.shore.net (Sam Weiner)eB Subject: Re: Somehow, D. Cutler (was Re: HP-UX will not be ported)1 Message-ID: <Cuep7.1346$v6.195113@news.shore.net>c  G In article <9nvjf1$p5u$2@bob.news.rcn.net>,  <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:d+ >In article <3BA28084.73167456@virgin.net>,f* >   Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote: >> >>Lars Poulsen wrote:e >>? >>> that VMS provided - from day one - a lot of code in the RMScE >>> (Record Management Subsystem) for which there is no equivalent ine? >>> Unix or TOPS, and which haas immense value for the businessy >>I >>Just a minor correction. TOPS-20 did support RMS but not as complete anoI >>implementation as in VMS. Don't recall if TOPS-10 ever had RMS support.a >dA >It was shipped as an application (kinda like FORTRAN). I finallyw$ >got it bundled in on the CUSP tape.  : The version of RMS for TOPS-10 fell behind TOPS-20 towards< the end.  Not sure when but by the time I got there in 1986.9 I don't think there was ever good enough documentation toh< use from other than COBOL and later FORTRAN.  When the first7 version of RMS-10 came out as part of COBOL, my pre DEC(7 employer tried to get interface information so we could 7 use RMS instead of trying to build our own indexed file. system and failed.  7 Unlike VMS where RMS is used by most utilities and usero9 programs, RMS on TOPS-* was not much used by the supplied03 utilities or customer programs outside COBOL shops.n   Samu" Last of the RMS-10/-20 maintainers   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Sep 2001 22:36:59 GMT From: jan_mothers@hotmail.comf Subject: Tan Without The Sun6 Message-ID: <9o39ib$6c6$1380@plutonium.btinternet.com>   Hi,   4 I think you will be extremely interested in DEEPTAN 7 tanning pills. I have been using them for just under a l2 year to provide me with a suntan without the sun.  They work perfectly.> Infact because I was so satisfied with the product I recently 0 decided to join the companies affiliate program.: The following is some brief information on the product for9 detailed information please click the link at the bottom. 9 I am certain you will be as satisfied with the product asC I have been.   Jan Mothersr  7 ======================================================= , Do You Want A Perfect Tan Safely And Easily?7 THE SECRET OF TANNING SAFELY AND EASILY WITHOUT THE SUNM$ As Seen On TV And The National Media7 =======================================================e  : DEEPTAN enables you to obtain a beautiful dark golden tan,. without exposing yourself to damaging UV rays.  6 No more burning, premature aging and even skin cancer.  9 Not a dyed, fake orange tan usually associated with otherl; tanning tablets and messy creams, but a natural golden tan.r  9 Find out how DEEPTAN will give you the perfect summer tanw1 within the comfort of your own home today, visit:-  7 http://home-shop.net/cgi-bin/cart/redeem.pl?aff=memb8520   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 15:13:22 -0400-/ From: "Joseph B. Gurman" <gurman@gsfc.nasa.gov>s5 Subject: The New Yorker's view of the proposed merger ? Message-ID: <gurman-652DBB.15132216092001@skates.gsfc.nasa.gov>o  H     Like most folks, I haven't been paying much attention to this group F for the last week. I don't know if anyone has posted the URL for this  article by James Surowiecki:  nI http://www.newyorker.com/THE_TALK_OF_THE_TOWN/CONTENT/?talk_the_financialu _pageI  %     A very reasonable analysis, IMHO.d                     Joe Gurman   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Sep 2001 15:07:05 -0700+ From: chris_doran@my-deja.com (Chris Doran)c5 Subject: Re: What RAM does a VAXstation 4000 VLC use? = Message-ID: <b5f3f0d8.0109161407.3d4e9648@posting.google.com>d  I mats@plea.se (Mats Magnusson) wrote in message news:<3ba34d99@plea.se>...i > ... C > 4000VLC use 72-pin simms. I'm not sure if the 4000vlc use special - > 72-pin-simms or can use any standard simms.  > ...i  F They seem to be standard. I've successfully interchanged them with PCs (and DecServer 700s).,   Christ   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 18:01:32 -0500t1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> 5 Subject: Re: What RAM does a VAXstation 4000 VLC use?d' Message-ID: <3BA52F4C.D93483A9@fsi.net>e   Chris Doran wrote: > K > mats@plea.se (Mats Magnusson) wrote in message news:<3ba34d99@plea.se>...r > > ...-E > > 4000VLC use 72-pin simms. I'm not sure if the 4000vlc use specialr/ > > 72-pin-simms or can use any standard simms.u > > ...: > H > They seem to be standard. I've successfully interchanged them with PCs > (and DecServer 700s).o  E Hoff posted recently that generic 4MB 72-pin parity SIMMs should work. fine.   D I realize that cross-country travel is rather a challenge right now.G Hoff's been silent here since the beginning of CETS (HPETS?). Sure hopeo
 he's alright..   -- e David J. Dachterae dba DJE SystemsM http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/s   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 23:06:50 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")5 Subject: Re: What RAM does a VAXstation 4000 VLC use?b8 Message-ID: <00A02252.0F0D2CF7@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  [ In article <3BA52F4C.D93483A9@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:t >Chris Doran wrote:m >> cL >> mats@plea.se (Mats Magnusson) wrote in message news:<3ba34d99@plea.se>... >> > ...F >> > 4000VLC use 72-pin simms. I'm not sure if the 4000vlc use special0 >> > 72-pin-simms or can use any standard simms. >> > ... >> nI >> They seem to be standard. I've successfully interchanged them with PCs, >> (and DecServer 700s). >@F >Hoff posted recently that generic 4MB 72-pin parity SIMMs should work >fine. >lE >I realize that cross-country travel is rather a challenge right now. H >Hoff's been silent here since the beginning of CETS (HPETS?). Sure hope >he's alright.  J I saw Hoff at CETS as recently as the Magic session on Thursday night.  He looked fine then.    -- Alan     O ===============================================================================h0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056@M  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA  94309-02103O ===============================================================================r   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 19:10:13 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> 5 Subject: Re: What RAM does a VAXstation 4000 VLC use?i' Message-ID: <3BA53F65.4824D80E@fsi.net>l  * Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote: > ] > In article <3BA52F4C.D93483A9@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:n > >Chris Doran wrote:l > >>N > >> mats@plea.se (Mats Magnusson) wrote in message news:<3ba34d99@plea.se>...
 > >> > ...H > >> > 4000VLC use 72-pin simms. I'm not sure if the 4000vlc use special2 > >> > 72-pin-simms or can use any standard simms.
 > >> > ... > >>K > >> They seem to be standard. I've successfully interchanged them with PCs  > >> (and DecServer 700s). > >sH > >Hoff posted recently that generic 4MB 72-pin parity SIMMs should work > >fine. > >oG > >I realize that cross-country travel is rather a challenge right now.-J > >Hoff's been silent here since the beginning of CETS (HPETS?). Sure hope > >he's alright. > L > I saw Hoff at CETS as recently as the Magic session on Thursday night.  He > looked fine then.o   *WHEW*! That's WONDERFUL news!   -- i David J. Dachterab dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/i   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 14:01:24 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>D Subject: Re: World Trade Center ( Message-ID: <9o2pb3$6b9$1@pyrite.mv.net>  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3BA4D115.DB730CB4@fsi.net...-   ...-  0 > I do commend you, Bill, on your calm approach.  D Thanks.  And I welcome the opportunity to discuss it in some kind of rational manner.    However, the statement F > you make begs the question: how many more WTC-like tragedies must weH > endure while we attempt to "exhaust other reasonable options", and endJ > up back at the same decision (to attack or not to attack? to nuke or not > to nuke?)?  L How many more WTC-like tragedies do you expect in the next few days, or evenJ weeks (remembering that the WTC attack reportedly took years to organize)?E If you do expect any, how many of them aren't already so far into the L execution stage that whatever we may do in some place like Afghanistan won't
 stop them?  L Exhausting reasonable options need not take large amounts of time.  Not evenE trying to do so is what starts to reduce us to terrorists ourselves -aI thinking that just because we *can* do something and are mad as hell thatoE gives us some kind of *right* to bypass the dictates of civilization.u   >nC > Another poster remarked about Japan's response to our bombings ofaE > Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan surrendered because they saw an enemyoB > become something they could no longer fight: and enemy who couldF > obliterate their nation and homeland in a matter of days - far worseE > than Nazi Germany could have ever hoped in its drive to achieve itsx > ends.o  K Leaving aside the question of the legitimacy of mass-murdering civilians tosJ make a point to their leaders (which bears some disturbing similarities toI what happened on Tuesday), we don't have any well-defined cohesive targeteF that  1) we can hit immediately and decisively and  2) is sufficientlyB inter-dependent that eliminating some parts of it will effectively discourage the rest.  H It is entirely possible for us to take decisive but inappropriate actionI that will *increase* the number and intensity of attacks against us - anddI arguably start to justify them.  It is also possible to take decisive and J appropriate action that can be seen as just by enough of the world that itD won't make things worse.  We get to choose, and I know that I have aJ definite preference for the latter for reasons both practical and ethical.   > I > Terrorists will not surrender, roll over and either "play nice" or die.tG > The only effective weapon we have is rendered useless by their belief I > that if we use it, we will send them exactly where they want to go (theoH > "next life"), and thus they will continue motivating and even escalateI > their motivation of the U.S. not only to continue a nuclear assault but * > even to escalate to a more global scale.  I If you're suggesting that we might just nuke 'em, I'll suggest that there E are a lot of people in this country who would immediately start doingpK everything in their power to destroy our country - its leaders, its cities,tE whatever it took - to stop it.  That number includes me:  I feel very E personally responsible for my country's actions, and that's an actiontH sufficiently well-defined to remove all doubt about how to respond to it appropriately.  ! Some options just aren't options.a   >r' > "Terrorism abatement" is an oxymoron.-  I That happens to be your opinion.  It also happens to be wrong.  There aree@ (as has just been observed elsewhere) *causes* (as distinct from6 *justifications*) for terrorism that can be addressed.  !  Terrorism appeasement would opentG > floodgates of terror and destruction that could never be closed, ever  > again.  H No one, at any point in this discussion, has suggested appeasement.  TheL hawks appear to be thoroughly confused about the difference between that andJ rational reaction - and I hope that those of us who can think more clearlyK can succeed in making that *their* problem rather than letting them make itu *everyone's* problem..  ?  Destroying terrorists and those who harbor or train terrorists-G > only generates more anti-U.S. sentiment among terrorist sympathizers,v > thus "propagating the cycle".i  D Destroying proven terrorists (i.e., those who have, to at least someJ reasonable standard of proof, knowingly executed or knowingly aided actualJ acts of terrorism) is an act that even other terrorists can understand theL justness of:  it doesn't make anything worse.  The same applies to those whoG knowingly and actively protect such people and refuse to cease doing so E after some reasonable warning - but note that if all they're doing is G refusing to do our work for us, as seems to be the case with the AfghanuJ government, going around rather than through them if possible is the moral choice to make.e  L Destroying those who only train terrorists, without actively aiding specificL acts of terrorism, is a bit dicier:  we have trained a great many terroristsJ ourselves (presumably for the best of motives, but that's a claim everyoneL is likely to make), and following that line of reasoning would result in theH execution of a large number of our own military and intelligence people.F Destroying those who only sympathize with terrorists, without activelyJ aiding specific acts of terrorism, has greater problems.  Destroying thoseC who just happen to be in the vicinity of terrorists, as seems to bee> acceptable to some people, is even worse if it's done with any fore-knowledge.o   >oI > All things considered, whatever the U.S. does, or even if it were to dob( > nothing, it's a lose-lose proposition.  
 No, it's not.b  E Eradicating those who were knowingly involved in Tuesday's attack (ormK equally culpable for some other terrorist act resulting in loss of life) isdH an obligation to civilization, and is therefore win for civilization andK lose for them.  We just have to be willing to go after terrorists in, e.g.,gK the IRA as avidly as we go after anyone else if we don't limit our focus toe Tuesday's attack.2  J Running amuck and killing a whole lot of other people in the process is anL offense against civilization, and is therefore a lose for civilization and aK win for the terrorists (both philosophically and in providing them with newd
 recruits).  L Trying to understand and start a dialogue about the root causes of terrorismK is both a win for civilization and a win for those who might otherwise feele driven to terrorism.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 14:20:34 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>d Subject: Re: World Trade Center % Message-ID: <3BA4FB82.3BA452@fsi.net>t   Bill Todd wrote: > > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message# > news:3BA4D115.DB730CB4@fsi.net...h
 > > [snip]K > > All things considered, whatever the U.S. does, or even if it were to dop* > > nothing, it's a lose-lose proposition. >  > No, it's not.r   I disagree, but that aside...,   The difficulty of...  G > Eradicating those who were knowingly involved in Tuesday's attack (oreJ > equally culpable for some other terrorist act resulting in loss of life)  H ...is perhaps the greatest challenge we currently face, in that we wouldA like to do it without the loss of innocent lives. I suspect - and2E greatly fear - that what we want to do and what we ultimately must dof7 will be found at very different points in the spectrum.n   > isJ > an obligation to civilization, and is therefore win for civilization and > lose for them. i  E For how long? Until the next terrorist( group) arises? ...and then weeD have to do the whole thing all over again, perhaps next time after a= strike on Chicago? ...Omaha? ...OK City (wouldn't *THAT* be aa "whammy"!)? ...DFW? ...LA? o  0 Where will we be hit be next? Where does it end?  = > We just have to be willing to go after terrorists in, e.g., M > the IRA as avidly as we go after anyone else if we don't limit our focus to  > Tuesday's attack.   G The IRA had never launched an assault on America using American objectsmE of everyday life as weapons of destruction (I purposely did *NOT* say D "mass destruction", though Bush himself did), nor have they launchedG such an assault on the UK. Car-bombs and other explosives are not foundoE in "everyday life" unless one works in a profession where such thingsmF are a tool of the trade (is terrorism a "trade"?), and even then, they6 have little place outside of trade-related activities.  L > Running amuck and killing a whole lot of other people in the process is anN > offense against civilization, and is therefore a lose for civilization and aM > win for the terrorists (both philosophically and in providing them with new  > recruits).  ? Then, I would need to ask again: what is an effective method ofhH deterrence of terrorism? What could *ANY* country do to send the messageD that terrorism will result in such terrible retribution that any whoD dare commit such acts will doom to utter destruction the very peopleB they seek to serve or avenge? Is this indeed the very message that terrorist are trying to convey?a  G Terrorists believe we will not nuke - and it is this weakness that they H will exploit the most ruthlessly. They've found our "soft underbelly". I! guess you know what that means...   N > Trying to understand and start a dialogue about the root causes of terrorismM > is both a win for civilization and a win for those who might otherwise feelt > driven to terrorism.  A ...but does it accomplish anything other than to encourage future 
 terrorism?  G How you feel about the U.S. nuking any target is exactly how we need totC make others feel about the terrorists that currently exist in theirS= midst or any future terrorists who may arise from among them.n  D ...IMHO, YMMV considerably, possibly (probably) even to the point of diametric opposition.n   -- u David J. Dachtera0 dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/u   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 21:26:49 +0200e& From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> Subject: Re: World Trade Centera) Message-ID: <3BA4FCF9.182C8AA@dplanet.ch>t   Jeff Campbell wrote: >  > John McLean wrote: > >e > > Well stated Bill ! > > H > > I certainly don't endorse the methods of the terrorists but I submitJ > > that they believe they held some justifiable reasons to be upset about > > US policies and actions. > >fH > > I also think that a purely military approach to the problem is not a > > useful long-term solution. > I > Tell that to the Germans or the Japanese. Or for that matter any of the=D > 'tribes' of western europe. The last 56 years has been the longestF > period in recorded european history of peace. If we had had the willH > at the time we could have disarmed Stalin along with rest. No occupied > eastern block. No cold war.e  G In both of those cases we had countries seeking to invade others and in D both of those cases the aggressors had substantial and quite definedG defense (or agressive) forces.  Both had their chances in international % forums and they chose to ignore them.i   > - > > It may in fact cause terrorists to becomea' > > even more extreme in their methods.o" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > L > > What is desperately needed is a review of why US actions should engenderH > > this kind of anger and what steps the US should take to reduce this.K > > Compromises both large and small might be very justified if they resultg > > in a more peaceful world.t > >f > I > This is totally inappropriate. We do not live to assuage other people'si > anger.  F No but the US should start to behave like a good citizen of the globalF village and take steps to reduce the favouritism and arrogance in many foreign and domestic policies.  E This is not simply a military thing either.  The Kyoto Agreement is a D good example of where the USA effectively told the rest of the worldF that it didn't care what damage US polution did to the environment andE to global warming.  This is not the hallmark of a good citizen of the4 global village.n  D Just because the USA is the biggest kid on the block it doesn't mean) that it shoul dforget to act responsibly.    > " > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>K > > The US is certainly not the only country whose actions upset others butsI > > mature leadership by the USA may do much to start to change attitudese > > everywhere.h > G > The attitude adjustment expected: do not attack the United States. An0A > overwhelming military response will descend upon you and yours.:  D You sound like you've just stepped from a 1950's western !  All thatA military action on its own will do is push any terrorists furthersF underground and force them to work harder to make their point.  Do youA really want biological or nuclear activity from these people ??? p  D It is clear that you do come from a country where many arguments areD supposedly "settled" with a weapon.  You have to rise above that andH take a mature attitude of discovering what the other side thinks and why somthing happened.     >  > >  > > John McLeany > >e >  > Jeff Campbellg > n8wxs@arrl.net     John McLeanr   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 21:32:19 +0200 & From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> Subject: Re: World Trade Centerl* Message-ID: <3BA4FE43.5A8BDD13@dplanet.ch>   Rob Young wrote: > T > In article <9o0p17$k8f$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes: > >S > N > >> > The US is certainly not the only country whose actions upset others butL > >> > mature leadership by the USA may do much to start to change attitudes > >> > everywhere. > >>J > >> The attitude adjustment expected: do not attack the United States. AnD > >> overwhelming military response will descend upon you and yours. > >eO > > The problem with the responses being discussed (and apparently supported bytO > > some here) is that they are not confined to those who directly participated.1 > > in or knowingly facilitated Tuesday's attack.  > >sN > > We have no more right to cause such deaths than Tuesday's perpetrators hadC > > to cause those on Tuesday.  Which leaves the following options:  > >a > 5 >         This sounds like some Far Left propaganda. n    E Please (or pleeze) define "Leftist" and explain how that differs fromoA closely examining *all* possible contributing factors then takinge1 appropriate action in all applicable directions.       John McLean=     >         Pleeze.= > % >                                 Rob=   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 21:44:41 +0200s& From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> Subject: Re: World Trade Center * Message-ID: <3BA50129.BECA07AB@dplanet.ch>   Rob Young wrote: > U > In article <3BA317FF.958E9FC3@dplanet.ch>, John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> writes:- > >-H > > I started out being very sympathetic to the USA but as the days passG > > their kneejerk reaction of reaching for a weapon and their stubbornVA > > refusal to even consider that their policies may somehow have ; > > contributed are combining to rapidly erode my sympathy.e > >5 > G >         Knee jerk?  Consider the facts that Bin Laden was responsible E >         for the WTC bombing, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole and nowiG >         a very wicked act of ramming the WTC towers and the Pentagon.i > E >         I would say that our patience has been more than exemplary.n  G Firstly, it has not been *proven* that he had anything to do with it orIA that he didn't give one of his people $50 million to do something0( against the USA but said "surprise me !"  D I suspect that the terrorists feel that they had a reason and unlikeH many, I am not going to jump to conclusions about what that reason mightD be.  I have suggested possible reasons but I would like very much to  hear their justification for it.   > 0 >         Consider some U.S. neutral situations.J >         China invanded Vietnam because of border excursions and that wasD >         quite a battle for a while.  WWI broke out due to a singleG >         assasination.  Iran and Iraq fought a multi-year war and what-K >         started that?  Iraq gassed Iranians in one of the more despicableo% >         acts in the 20th century...:  C And one would hope that the USA is more mature and responsible thand these countries.  C For the record, the assination that started WW I was no more than a-G flashpoint for a situation that was already perilously close.  Much theAH same as the US ship gathering Intelligence in the Gulf of Tonkin was the flashpoint for Vietnam.m   > 3 >         Folks whine and carry on about "talking".tL >         The time for talking has long since passed and these folks want noI >         interaction with us at all , short of terrorizing us.  They areoD >         certainly unapproachable and it really doesn't matter now.  < Aren't you in the least bit interested in discovering why ??  B Unless the US bothers to discover Why it will be very difficult toF anticipate future attacks and under current circumstances, I would sayD that they will be fairly inevitable.  More to the point, the bar has been raised for terrorism.  E Would sir like his next terorist attack to be biological or nuclear ?a     John McLeane   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 21:40:40 +0100t% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>s Subject: Re: World Trade Centerh) Message-ID: <3BA50E48.7C1F318@virgin.net>e   Bill Todd wrote:  K > If you're suggesting that we might just nuke 'em, I'll suggest that theren  I Not much air time seems to be given to the fact that Pakistan has nuclearhN weapons and now news agencies talk about the risk of destabilising the countryJ as something worth taking to reach Bin Laden. Troublesome. Talk of limited= nuclear strikes is now acceptable. What the fuck is going on?i   >oG > are a lot of people in this country who would immediately start doingsM > everything in their power to destroy our country - its leaders, its cities,wG > whatever it took - to stop it.  That number includes me:  I feel veryeG > personally responsible for my country's actions, and that's an actionfJ > sufficiently well-defined to remove all doubt about how to respond to it > appropriately. >   K Take care Bill. I do think America is about to do something very foolish. IaL can't get 1930s Germany out of my head right now. "These people aren't human beings. They are animals."  J > No one, at any point in this discussion, has suggested appeasement.  TheN > hawks appear to be thoroughly confused about the difference between that andL > rational reaction - and I hope that those of us who can think more clearlyM > can succeed in making that *their* problem rather than letting them make ita > *everyone's* problem.. >s  M If Rob predicts something about Compaq's future actions it is probably wrong.tL When he predicts what the US will do next  I fear he is correct. All out warO with no exit strategy other than total defeat of the Muslim world. Afghanistan?uM Hah. If we're not careful by the time this is over the middle east will be inmN flames, the oil-fields gone, half the world in ruins. Civil wars raging in theI west. Apocalyptic? Yes. As unbelievable as destruction of the World TradeoJ Centre, The Pentagon and the possible shooting down of another airliner toP prevent it crashing into Air Force One? Or did a bunch of good old US passengersK in best Die Hard traditions rush the cockpit. Most will want to believe the N latter but if the account of one call from the plane is correct. "There's beenL an explosion, there's smoke everywhere. We're going down. [Screams], [Roar],H [Call dropped]", then that was an air-to-air missile. Not brave citizensL wresting control. Another call had the hijacker say on the cabin PA "This isN your captain speaking. We are accepting their demands and are returning to theP airport." Just before the plane fell from the sky. Who's demands? Sounds like heM was being buzzed by something at the time. Now, under circumstances , I would J have ordered it shot down but I'd have said so. I sincerely hope it wasn't@ because if the government is trying to hush even that up then...  P Why was Dick Cheney evacuated from the White House but not other staff while AF1M climbs to 40,000 ft and runs off in the opposite direction. Had Saddam ran sorO visibly from the bombs America would proclaim it as proof of cowardice. But no. K It is "protecting the succession". The rest of the White House and PentagonsN staff were left to fate even though Cheney admitted today on NBC that they hadL 12 minutes warning - enough time to whisk him into the bunker but not enoughN time to press the fire-alarm either there or in the Pentagon despite what they had already seen at the WTCt    N > Trying to understand and start a dialogue about the root causes of terrorismM > is both a win for civilization and a win for those who might otherwise feelt > driven to terrorism. >o  P I don't think that's the plan. Unless Bush is bluffing with Oscar winning actingL then I believe what he says. This is all out, multi-year war. Only question. What's next and how soon?,P Is that what America really wants? A chance to replay Vietnam on a global scale. I hope I'm wrong.i   >b > - bill   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Sep 2001 16:09:44 -0500+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)n Subject: Re: World Trade Center.3 Message-ID: <SXQ0rE2XBoO9@eisner.encompasserve.org>s  Y In article <3BA4FB82.3BA452@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:e   >> istK >> an obligation to civilization, and is therefore win for civilization ando >> lose for them.  > G > For how long? Until the next terrorist( group) arises? ...and then wewF > have to do the whole thing all over again, perhaps next time after a? > strike on Chicago? ...Omaha? ...OK City (wouldn't *THAT* be ae > "whammy"!)? ...DFW? ...LA? s > 2 > Where will we be hit be next? Where does it end? >   ? 	This is a very tough call.  And probably unstoppable.  But theiA 	vicious circle that could result wasn't/isn't something we askedt< 	for.  We can pretty much be certain that 1-2 years from now> 	terrorists *won't* be operating out of Afghanisitan (assuming? 	no infrastructure at all is left).  That's a nasty conclusion.h  C 	The very large incentive would be not to have terrorists operatingeF 	with impunity out of your country.  That is why somewhat surprisinglyB 	Saddam himself condemns this action.  The clear message of course@ 	is that if a terrorist act occurs against this country, we will 	come hard against you.i  D 	The sad thing is that innocents will suffer.  That isn't comfortingC 	and really presses home to me the whole matter of sin and darkness0B 	in man's heart that causes him to do such things to each other in@ 	the light of eternity and the surety that Christ will return in 	all His glory.l   				Rob:   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 22:27:40 +0100s% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>i Subject: Re: World Trade Centera* Message-ID: <3BA5194C.E472EBEF@virgin.net>   Rob Young declares Holy War:  H >         This is a very tough call.  And probably unstoppable.  But theJ >         vicious circle that could result wasn't/isn't something we askedE >         for.  We can pretty much be certain that 1-2 years from nowuG >         terrorists *won't* be operating out of Afghanisitan (assuminglH >         no infrastructure at all is left).  That's a nasty conclusion. >   3 And neighbouring Pakistan with its nuclear weapons?a   >aL >         The very large incentive would be not to have terrorists operatingO >         with impunity out of your country.  That is why somewhat surprisinglyiK >         Saddam himself condemns this action.  The clear message of courseaI >         is that if a terrorist act occurs against this country, we willn  >         come hard against you.  \ If Britain had responded to IRA strikes with your thinking we'd have turned Ireland into theZ middle east. Helicopter gunships would have taken out Sinn Fein buildings in Derry and the[ whole of Ireland re-occupied - and some did argue for just that. For all our sakes grow up.sX This is not a game. What happened was terrible. Don't fall into someone's trap and startV something you can't stop. What do you think whoever planned this expected to happen in response? Think about that.)  M >         The sad thing is that innocents will suffer.  That isn't comfortingeL >         and really presses home to me the whole matter of sin and darknessK >         in man's heart that causes him to do such things to each other in I >         the light of eternity and the surety that Christ will return inm >         all His glory. >f  ] So the only thing that allows you to override your humanity is a (not provable by definition)iW belief that Christ will save us all? Remind me - Who's "Holy War" are we fighting here?t   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 16:43:18 -0500e1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>  Subject: Re: World Trade Centerw' Message-ID: <3BA51CF6.5323EA2D@fsi.net>h   Rob Young wrote: > [snip]M >         The sad thing is that innocents will suffer.  That isn't comfortingeL >         and really presses home to me the whole matter of sin and darknessK >         in man's heart that causes him to do such things to each other ineI >         the light of eternity and the surety that Christ will return ino >         all His glory.  : Indeed. Expect the "end times" talk to resume any day now.  H I know I lead rather a sheltered life, but did the rapture already occur< and I missed it? Was WTC merely a cover for a greater event?  C I'm sure many thought the Second Coming was due at the rise of Nazi H Germany. With "The World on the Brink", many (including myself) hope forA that now. Still, the "front" is not in the Valley of Megiddo yet.SB Likely, there is more to come which will test our spirits further.  B Of that, I have no doubt. I always believed I'd live to see it, no5 matter what becomes of me. It may yet come to pass...    -- t David J. Dachterae dba DJE Systemsi http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/-   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 22:59:55 +0100n% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>a Subject: Re: World Trade Centerp* Message-ID: <3BA520DA.102E9827@virgin.net>   "David J. Dachtera" wrote:  = > RIndeed. Expect the "end times" talk to resume any day now.  >tJ > I know I lead rather a sheltered life, but did the rapture already occur> > and I missed it? Was WTC merely a cover for a greater event? > E > I'm sure many thought the Second Coming was due at the rise of Nazi J > Germany. With "The World on the Brink", many (including myself) hope forC > that now. Still, the "front" is not in the Valley of Megiddo yet.aD > Likely, there is more to come which will test our spirits further. >fD > Of that, I have no doubt. I always believed I'd live to see it, no7 > matter what becomes of me. It may yet come to pass...o >w  K Jesus, I'm sure, would have been disgusted by the talk in his name. Let the 1 country without sin cast the next cruise missile.l --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------   Date: 17 Sep 2001 01:04:06 GMT' From: dashw459@aol.comeatspam (Doug W.)  Subject: Re: World Trade Centerc9 Message-ID: <20010916210406.18757.00001371@mb-ch.aol.com>m  &  the_bagbournes@btinternet.com  wrote:  H << Why cannot the US reign in Israel's agression? No, Palestine is not aK country, but it is a nation. Some change of rhetoric, some criticism of thetH heavy handedness of Israel's policies would do wonders in bringing about more reason. >>a  K The US has influence in Israel, but not the ability to reign in behavior atvJ will.  One must have a better idea with a chance of success along with theJ power and ability to generate support from different groups.   Not an easyM task.  In the past the US has tried to promote peace in the Middle East.  The H US does not have the power, influence or energy to solve every difficultN problem.  This makes it a target when things go wrong.  Too often many partiesE feel they have been mistreated by the US whether it acts or does not.s  I Also, its difficult to encourage Israel to change its behavior when it isuN attacked by terrorists.  One finds onself questioning how  they would react ifO confronted with similar circumstances.  Unfortunately, the US is now confrontedeN by these circumstances.  We shall see.  The only hopeful thing I see is Bush'sM linkage of terrorists and the governments that support them.  Without support L from a state there could be no large scale terrrorism.  Cetainly not private& armies dedicated to inhumane insanity.  O Many in the US are repulsed viewing news coverage from Israel and more recently! the downtown NYC area.              w   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 02:05:56 GMTk4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>- Subject: Re: WSJ reporting HP will buy Compaq?> Message-ID: <8Ucp7.47485$bl4.10632232@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3B96C386.502DDFE3@fsi.net...i > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:o > >s> > > "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message1 > > news:c6++ipTJBb9o@eisner.encompasserve.org...t@ > > > In article <9n26g8$9oj$1@neptunium.btinternet.com>, "Daza"% > > <blahblah@btinternet.com> writes:n > > > H > > > > I imagine that the one time cost of porting OpenVMS to IA64 will stillB? > > > > make sense.  Don't expect any new functionality though.f > > >tH > > > I am not inclined to place much faith in someone who does not sign > > > their name.t > >oF > > Name or no name, the port has begun. T64 will port faster (thanks, Bravo),aI > > bu there's no reason VMS can't or won't. Pissing off a 450K user basea would ! > > not be a wise thing to do....t >UH > In that case, I've yet to see any wisdom "wizzed", especially in lightI > of both recent and current events. My guess is that 475k dropped rather A > dramatically lately and is now probably closer to 350k, +/- 50kn  J Wouldn't be surprising at all, given the mix of T64 and VMS sales of late., But only the VMS beancounters know for sure.   >uG > Question: if a judge sentences a wizard to the gallows, is he said tos1 > hang a wiz? (sorry - couldn't resist that one).  >   2 And if you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn?   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 03:47:13 GMTo4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>- Subject: Re: WSJ reporting HP will buy Compaqc> Message-ID: <5nep7.47894$bl4.10710678@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>  J Looks like the VMS Group has received funding for additional headcount forI the IPF port. All major ISVs (but one) on board. Dunno who's still on thecH outs, but all in all things don't look too bad.  This info from a pal of, Charlie Matco and Cedric Zool: Lloyd Bridges  (Deep Diver, August 16, 2001).h   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.517 ************************