[eDebate] ellis on london

Andrew Culp acculp
Thu Jul 5 10:29:31 CDT 2007


Come on Andy, you should know better.  Al Qaeda does not have a centralized operating structure where "leaders" order attacks and peons follow.  They have network-style cell structure, not an authoritarian one.  Much like anyone can do something in the name of Earth First! or the ELF, anyone can do anything in the name of AQ (and occasionally ask for resources, or meet with other people "connected" but only in the loose sense)

This analysis might provide some london-specific insight: http://youtube.com/watch?v=4xyM5XRcjMw.


-----Original Message-----
>From: edebate-request at www.ndtceda.com
>Sent: Jul 4, 2007 10:00 AM
>To: edebate at www.ndtceda.com
>Subject: eDebate Digest, Vol 22, Issue 3
>
>Send eDebate mailing list submissions to
>	edebate at www.ndtceda.com
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	edebate-request at www.ndtceda.com
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	edebate-owner at www.ndtceda.com
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of eDebate digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Can debate be activism? (Alfred Snider)
>   2. Re: Can debate be activism? (Andy Ellis)
>   3. Re: petition against bush's commutation of libby
>      (db8coach at cox.net)
>   4. Re: petition against bush's commutation of libby (Darren Elliott)
>   5. petition against bush's commutation of libby (Trond E. Jacobsen)
>   6. Re: petition against bush's commutation of libby (matt stannard)
>   7. Re: petition against bush's commutation of libby (NEIL BERCH)
>   8. Is this activism? (debate at ou.edu)
>   9. Re: petition against bush's commutation of libby (Andy Ellis)
>  10. Some questions about london glasgow (Andy Ellis)
>  11. Free Scoot Now! (Michael Korcok)
>  12. argument #2 (Kevin Sanchez)
>  13.  petition against bush's commutation of libby
>      (scottelliott at grandecom.net)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:21:42 +0200
>From: Alfred Snider <alfred.snider at uvm.edu>
>Subject: [eDebate] Can debate be activism?
>To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>Message-ID: <468A93B6.7090101 at uvm.edu>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Deny that this stuff is activism!
>
>To think that competitive policy debate is all there is can be an error.
>While I support the activist move in policy debate, there is so much more...
>
> From the debate community globally:
>
>http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/
>
>Check out what is happening on YouTube:
>
>http://youdebate.blogspot.com/
>
>This is only the tip of the iceberg.
>
>Expand your debate horizons!
>
>Tuna
>
>-- 
>Alfred C. Snider aka Tuna
>Edwin Lawrence Professor of Forensics
>University of Vermont
>Huber House, 475 Main Street, UVM, Burlington, VT 05405 USA
>Global Debate Blog http://debate.uvm.edu/debateblog/
>Debate Training site http://debate.uvm.edu
>World Debate Institute http://debate.uvm.edu/wdi/
>GATEWAY TO ALL THINGS DEBATE http://debateoneworld.org
>802-656-0097 office telephone
>802-656-4275 office fax
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 16:10:52 -0400
>From: "Andy Ellis" <andy.edebate at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [eDebate] Can debate be activism?
>To: "Alfred Snider" <alfred.snider at uvm.edu>
>Cc: edebate at ndtceda.com
>Message-ID:
>	<9368bc9b0707031310k21ffb46en6ac0af73118afed6 at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>Perm--- use competitive policy debate as an activist training and education
>space, and check out tuna's stuff. BAMN Horizons expanded!
>
>On 7/3/07, Alfred Snider <alfred.snider at uvm.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Deny that this stuff is activism!
>>
>> To think that competitive policy debate is all there is can be an error.
>> While I support the activist move in policy debate, there is so much
>> more...
>>
>> From the debate community globally:
>>
>> http://debatevideoblog.blogspot.com/
>>
>> Check out what is happening on YouTube:
>>
>> http://youdebate.blogspot.com/
>>
>> This is only the tip of the iceberg.
>>
>> Expand your debate horizons!
>>
>> Tuna
>>
>> --
>> Alfred C. Snider aka Tuna
>> Edwin Lawrence Professor of Forensics
>> University of Vermont
>> Huber House, 475 Main Street, UVM, Burlington, VT 05405 USA
>> Global Debate Blog http://debate.uvm.edu/debateblog/
>> Debate Training site http://debate.uvm.edu
>> World Debate Institute http://debate.uvm.edu/wdi/
>> GATEWAY TO ALL THINGS DEBATE http://debateoneworld.org
>> 802-656-0097 office telephone
>> 802-656-4275 office fax
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> eDebate mailing list
>> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>>
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070703/272ccba2/attachment.html 
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 20:29:38 -0400
>From: <db8coach at cox.net>
>Subject: Re: [eDebate] petition against bush's commutation of libby
>To: edebate at ndtceda.com, Jim Hanson <hansonjb at whitman.edu>
>Message-ID:
>	<7340542.1183508978906.JavaMail.root at fed1wml04.mgt.cox.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
> 2. in doing this, this administration has hit nixonian levels of corruption. do something wrong? just pardon whoever gets blamed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>It has been a while, and I tend to forget things, but how much time did Clinton serve for his perjury and obstruction in a federal sexual harassment case???
>
>Bob
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:48:18 -0500
>From: "Darren Elliott" <delliott at kckcc.edu>
>Subject: Re: [eDebate] petition against bush's commutation of libby
>To: <db8coach at cox.net>,<edebate at ndtceda.com>, <hansonjb at whitman.edu>
>Message-ID: <s68aa807.080 at netware.kckcc.edu>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
>What comes around is fair play.  It was Scooter Libby afterall who argued that Bill Clinton should pardon fugitive Marc Rich, convicted of tax evasion and one of Bill's most controversial pardons.  Remember Rich's wife made many contributions to the Clinton library, and to Hillary for Senate.  Scooter and Denise Rich were successful in their plea to Bill.  Rich was also involved in shady oil-for-food kickback schemes.  I guess Scooter was just proving again being a part of the machine is all that matters.  What's good for the Donkey is good for the Elephant.
>
>PS--If I ever become President I am totally going to pardon Andy Ellis ; )
>
>chief
>
>>>> <db8coach at cox.net> 07/03/07 7:29 PM >>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
> 2. in doing this, this administration has hit nixonian levels of corruption. do something wrong? just pardon whoever gets blamed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>It has been a while, and I tend to forget things, but how much time did Clinton serve for his perjury and obstruction in a federal sexual harassment case???
>
>Bob
>
>_______________________________________________
>eDebate mailing list
>eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>
>-- 
>This message has been scanned for viruses and
>dangerous content by KCKCC's MailScanner, and is
>believed to be clean.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 21:19:01 -0400
>From: "Trond E. Jacobsen" <Trond at umich.edu>
>Subject: [eDebate] petition against bush's commutation of libby
>To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>Message-ID: <20070703211901.32fcuj8c4coggkwg at web.mail.umich.edu>
>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=ISO-8859-1;	format="flowed"
>
>Bob, I think your bigger problem is logic, not memory.  Turn off the 
>hate radio.
>
>Libby, convicted of lying and obstructing a federal investigation.
>Clinton, convicted of nothing.
>
>Bush, commuting sentence of former high official while in office to 
>frustrate ongoing inquiries and to protect himself and the 
>Vice-President
>Clinton, neither pardoned nor commuted sentence of any administration 
>official during office.
>
>Fitzgerald, spent a few million and reached a conviction.
>Starr and fellow chumps, spent $50 million and returned diddly-squat.  
>Jones also proved squat.
>
>Libby, assailed by media and pundits as "stand-up" guy set up as scapegoat.
>Clinton pursued by right-wing plutocrats funding smear campaigns.
>
>Libby, pursued by GOP-appointed Republican federal prosecutor respected 
>as one of the handful of best federal prosecutors in the nation
>Clinton pursued by hard-partisan GOP special prosecutor actively 
>involved in supporting GOP campaigns
>
>Clinton's antagonist appointed by his own DOJ but operated independently.
>Abu Gonzales' DOJ...need I say more?
>
>And finally, I know it is trite and some may be offended, but...
>
>sexual harassment - never proven mind you - is not outing a covert 
>agent as part of a campaign to lie the country into a catastrophic war.
>
>lying about sexual harassment - never proven mind you - is not the same 
>as being convicted of lying about outing a CIA operative.  And I am not 
>even all postal about outing CIA agents.
>
>These weeds need to be pulled, roots and all.
>
>Trond E. Jacobsen
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 19:22:29 -0600
>From: matt stannard <stannardmatt at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [eDebate] petition against bush's commutation of libby
>To: <db8coach at cox.net>, <edebate at ndtceda.com>, Jim Hanson
>	<hansonjb at whitman.edu>
>Message-ID: <BAY101-W2469EECFFC1356064EF4A6D2030 at phx.gbl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
>
>Bob:
> 
>The "Clinton did it too" trope actually does work against a lot of hardline democrats.  But what about those of us who believe Clinton SHOULD have been impeached and prosecuted?  Do we purists get a free pass from you?  
> 
>mjs> Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 20:29:38 -0400> From: db8coach at cox.net> To: edebate at ndtceda.com; hansonjb at whitman.edu> Subject: Re: [eDebate] petition against bush's commutation of libby> > >>>>>>>>>>> 2. in doing this, this administration has hit nixonian levels of corruption. do something wrong? just pardon whoever gets blamed.> >>>>>>>>>>> > It has been a while, and I tend to forget things, but how much time did Clinton serve for his perjury and obstruction in a federal sexual harassment case???> > Bob> > _______________________________________________> eDebate mailing list> eDebate at www.ndtceda.com> http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>_________________________________________________________________
>PC Magazine?s 2007 editors? choice for best web mail?award-winning Windows Live Hotmail.
>http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HMWL_mini_pcmag_0707
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070703/ec94ee38/attachment-0001.htm 
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 21:44:46 -0400
>From: "NEIL BERCH" <berchnorto at msn.com>
>Subject: Re: [eDebate] petition against bush's commutation of libby
>To: <edebate at ndtceda.com>,	"Trond E. Jacobsen" <Trond at umich.edu>
>Message-ID: <BAY106-DAV15A3726BC817A1767DCE92D3030 at phx.gbl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>And when Bush was governor of Texas, he made it very clear that there were only two circumstances in which he would use his (limited) commutation power.  He said (and this referred to people who were going to be executed, not sent to prison for 2-3 years) that the only questions he addressed were whether they were guilty and whether they got due process ("My job is to ask two questions. Is the person guilty of the crime? And did the person have full access to the courts of law?"--transcript of October 17, 2000 debate with Al Gore).
>
>If he was satisfied of both of those (and he always was, after getting a memo from his counsel, who for some of that period was Alberto Gonzales), he said it was not his role to judge whether the penalty was appropriate.  He continued to have that position for the first 6 years, 5 months, and 11 days of his presidency.  Suddenly, he's an expert on sentencing proportionality.  Perhaps constitutional law is next?!
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Trond E. Jacobsen<mailto:Trond at umich.edu> 
>  To: edebate at ndtceda.com<mailto:edebate at ndtceda.com> 
>  Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 9:19 PM
>  Subject: [eDebate] petition against bush's commutation of libby
>
>
>  Bob, I think your bigger problem is logic, not memory.  Turn off the 
>  hate radio.
>
>  Libby, convicted of lying and obstructing a federal investigation.
>  Clinton, convicted of nothing.
>
>  Bush, commuting sentence of former high official while in office to 
>  frustrate ongoing inquiries and to protect himself and the 
>  Vice-President
>  Clinton, neither pardoned nor commuted sentence of any administration 
>  official during office.
>
>  Fitzgerald, spent a few million and reached a conviction.
>  Starr and fellow chumps, spent $50 million and returned diddly-squat.  
>  Jones also proved squat.
>
>  Libby, assailed by media and pundits as "stand-up" guy set up as scapegoat.
>  Clinton pursued by right-wing plutocrats funding smear campaigns.
>
>  Libby, pursued by GOP-appointed Republican federal prosecutor respected 
>  as one of the handful of best federal prosecutors in the nation
>  Clinton pursued by hard-partisan GOP special prosecutor actively 
>  involved in supporting GOP campaigns
>
>  Clinton's antagonist appointed by his own DOJ but operated independently.
>  Abu Gonzales' DOJ...need I say more?
>
>  And finally, I know it is trite and some may be offended, but...
>
>  sexual harassment - never proven mind you - is not outing a covert 
>  agent as part of a campaign to lie the country into a catastrophic war.
>
>  lying about sexual harassment - never proven mind you - is not the same 
>  as being convicted of lying about outing a CIA operative.  And I am not 
>  even all postal about outing CIA agents.
>
>  These weeds need to be pulled, roots and all.
>
>  Trond E. Jacobsen
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  eDebate mailing list
>  eDebate at www.ndtceda.com<mailto:eDebate at www.ndtceda.com>
>  http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate<http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate>
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070703/b4d5e56c/attachment-0001.htm 
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 8
>Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:58:46 -0500
>From: debate at ou.edu
>Subject: [eDebate] Is this activism?
>To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>Message-ID: <f71597bd4be2.468ab886 at ou.edu>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>"petitioning against bush's commutation of libby!"
>
>
>who posts without signing their name anyway?
>
>oh yeah that p person
>
>
>peace
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 9
>Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 23:12:01 -0400
>From: "Andy Ellis" <andy.edebate at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [eDebate] petition against bush's commutation of libby
>To: "NEIL BERCH" <berchnorto at msn.com>
>Cc: edebate at ndtceda.com, "Trond E. Jacobsen" <Trond at umich.edu>
>Message-ID:
>	<9368bc9b0707032012m1388dba2m9052361f706d8e7e at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>and yet leonard peltier still sits in a jail cell....
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070703/75012e2a/attachment-0001.htm 
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 10
>Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 00:28:51 -0400
>From: "Andy Ellis" <andy.edebate at gmail.com>
>Subject: [eDebate] Some questions about london glasgow
>To: EDEBATE <edebate at ndtceda.com>
>Message-ID:
>	<9368bc9b0707032128l40c0f1e3xe5b9e48f4186cc7a at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>why is al queda in iraq "dropping off" car bombs in london? Suicide attacks
>seem to be their typical MO. Granted IED's have been an oft used weapon, but
>these cars are not seemingly the way to introduce ied's to the west when
>much smaller easier to build devices are more simple and in some senses more
>terrifying. Car bombs of this style seem to be the work of secular
>terrorists like tim mcveigh or the ira at points during the last several
>decades, But AQ-I car bombs seem their most effective when the driver sticks
>with the car till the bomb goes off, and this makes sense given the ideology
>of the org (as represented in the west).
>
>Why would AQ-I waste valuble resources like doctors on half assed car bombs,
>clearly they have people who can build car bombs. And apparently they have
>strategic interest in doctors, but it seems like its against the stated
>strategic interest to have doctors who dont die in car bombings, get
>arrested. It seems like before these guys blew up aq-i 's brittish doctor
>spot they would have done the things that doctors can uniquely do and would
>have risked it on something that a variety of people could do better.
>
>Why is the terrorism link to the brittish medicine system being drawn out in
>the media  right as michael moores critiquie offers it as an alternative?
>
>There are other questions to be sure....but lets start with these...im not
>suggesting an alt, just asking ?'s
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070704/5276a578/attachment-0001.htm 
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 11
>Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 22:03:30 -0700
>From: Michael Korcok <mmk_savant at hotmail.com>
>Subject: [eDebate] Free Scoot Now!
>To: "edebate at ndtceda.com" <edebate at ndtceda.com>
>Message-ID: <BAY111-W19AF4D4DBE7009C921C68AE4030 at phx.gbl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>oh wait, he did.  but if Bush doesn't pardon him, he is still in for a whopping $250,000 fine.  
> 
>DAMN...  that is one expensive frikkin lie.  so, unh, kids, it is still BAD to lie to the government.  unless you want to.  then it's ok.
> 
>so the whole Wilson/Plame episode comes to... pretty much nothing.  good call investing yourselves in it.  and a petition as the cherry on top of that shit parfait... oh my.
> 
>will you focus on something even remotely important now?  well, Andy is still pissed Clinton didn't release a murderer serving a life sentence, so that's a no from him.  way to prioritize, Ellis.  as the No Parole Peltier Association notes as i write this,  "11695 days, 21 hours, 43 minutes, and 16 seconds have passed since Agents Coler and Williams were murdered on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. They will never come home."
> 
>anyway, Windows Live has now stuck me with the small font from the quote and I am uninterested in figuring out how to fix it.  but it is bugging me.  so no witty repartee to Trond's typically overwrought "GOTTA PULL IT OUT BY THE ROOTS" melodrama...  HEY!!!  did the font just decrease in size even more...  the incredible shrinking post.  gotta go.
> 
>Michael Korcok
> 
>_________________________________________________________________
>Missed the show?? Watch videos of the Live Earth Concert on MSN.
>http://liveearth.msn.com
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20070703/693ae44e/attachment-0001.htm 
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 12
>Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 05:38:21 -0500
>From: "Kevin Sanchez" <let_the_american_empire_burn at hotmail.com>
>Subject: [eDebate] argument #2
>To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>Message-ID: <BAY102-F9C2873B9EDB8C6A1015B8D8030 at phx.gbl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
>as i said before, there were two arguments flying below the radar in josh 
>hoe's posts from last month which i thought needed to be addressed more 
>explicitly. he informs me that due to work constraints he'll be unable to 
>better defend argument #1 (dealt with here: 
>http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2007-June/071421.html). what 
>follows is a response to a second argument that speaks directly to a concern 
>raised by many in the recent topicality discussion, including the anonymous 
>'lover of laughter' named philogelos (see here: 
>http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2007-June/071440.html). it also 
>supplements point (2) in my response to philogelos (here: 
>http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2007-July/071444.html).
>
>_
>
>argument #2 -- 'debaters will just talk about whatever they want'.
>
>my view of democratic self-government is banal, i suppose: government 
>governs best which governs least. some things we need uniformity on (say, 
>the criminality of murder, or the length of a debate round), but to the 
>extent possible, we should continually strive to include the widest range of 
>differences.
>
>the question then is, who decides when a given function of government has 
>become unncessary?, and i find sometimes the least useful people to ask are 
>the functionaries themselves. this is true of any organization really. the 
>topic committee and their defenders are likely to see any alternative to the 
>topic process as 'anarchy' because their job is producing topics. 
>'democratic empowerment' (as un-grandiosely as we can use that phrase) means 
>putting previously self-evident ways of doing things into question in hopes 
>of turning an accepted consensus into a more rational one. if debaters, 
>coaches and directors can come up with a better system from the ground-up (a 
>process of online disclosure) which provides for more predictable and 
>educational debates, why not make the attempt?
>
>i thought giving as much decision-making power as possible to the smallest 
>units possible was called democracy, not anarchism. no one is contemplating 
>the elimination of 'the state' here: the topic committee can continue to do 
>what they do, but the results of their process will simply have a less 
>restrictive and more suggestive purpose. this in turn will free up the 
>committee to raise topics that're less bounded to the inherently impossible 
>task of equally divvying ground and focus more on timeliness and relevance.
>
>was the dixie round 7 experiment 'anarchism'?... or was it trusting 
>debaters, and expecting a certain level of responsibility/professionalism 
>from them as well? isn't that what student-centered pedagogy is all about...
>
>http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2001-October/035402.html
>http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2001-October/035343.html
>http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/2001-November/036355.html
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>http://liveearth.msn.com
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 13
>Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 09:46:35 -0500
>From: scottelliott at grandecom.net
>Subject: [eDebate]  petition against bush's commutation of libby
>To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>Message-ID: <1183560395.468bb2cbe2d10 at webmail.grandecom.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>
>Just hope all of the liberals apply their sanctimony to the Clintons.
>
>What was the name of the guy who bought the Clinton Library and a pardon,with
>Hillary personally participating in the discussions, for MILLIONS  of dollars?
>Marc Rich?
>
>Scott
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>eDebate mailing list
>eDebate at www.ndtceda.com
>http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate
>
>End of eDebate Digest, Vol 22, Issue 3
>**************************************




More information about the Mailman mailing list