"SHOULD"'s for artificial intelligence and pedagogues
Humans have think. (Soon to be a once upon a time.)
And what do people have to add to dialogue when they're bloody angry?
steppe
----- Original Message -----
From: Kevin White
To: NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: [NewPacifica] Re: [pacifica_now] Cindy Sheehan just removed from
hearing
A hearing is what she wanted. She was in fact sitting in the hearing. She
should have remained quiet. And when she did speak, it had not merit. It didn't
add anything to the dialog. She shouted "Thank you!" to one person's
testimoney. And when Waxman asked her by name to respect the procedings, so she
shouted, "Thank you" again. So in all, she deliberately got herself thrown out.
If she had said anyting of any value to removing the current adminstration from
office then it wasn't broadcast. To me it looked like a bid for attention.
Plus, I was directly quoting from her retirement letter she sent out last
year.
As to "nobility," unfortunately Wall Street has such an impact on our
manufactured concent that I now question all sides. It's quite refreshing in
fact.
Kevin White
----- Original Message ----
From: stephan <sgeras@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 6:18:24 PM
Subject: Re: [NewPacifica] Re: [pacifica_now] Cindy Sheehan just removed from
hearing
media whore?
and you're a listserve eunuch?
what kind of nonsense are you spouting?
a person needs to speak out and when a person is in a democratic process; a
person doesn't need to respect (frivolous) "civilized" proceedural protocol
where that protocol extends the abuse of power--that' s the "rub"; "whether
'tis nobler to accept...", or perhaps "nobility" has nothing to do with the
decision since "protocol" is a means of suppressing dissent ----the chicago 7,
or mumia didn't need to "dress appropriately" for fair trials, nor does cindy
need to "address appropriately" .
youuse got too much civilization. ..soon come the "babarian hordes".
steppe
----- Original Message -----
From: Kevin White
To: pacifica_now@ yahoogroups. com ; NewPacifica@ yahoogroups. com ;
fulcrumsofchange@ pacificana. org
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 1:36 PM
Subject: [NewPacifica] Re: [pacifica_now] Cindy Sheehan just removed from
hearing
Maybe she is a media whore after all...
----- Original Message ----
From: Melinda Iley-Dohn <Iley_dohn@yahoo. com>
To: pacifica_now@ yahoogroups. com; NewPacifica@ yahoogroups. com;
fulcrumsofchange@ pacificana. org
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 12:30:59 PM
Subject: Re: [pacifica_now] Cindy Sheehan just removed from hearing
I FIRMLY believe in speaking out. I carried a sign a week ago to a hearing
that John Conyers attended regarding the heinous Houston Crimminal system but I
didn't yell out.
I held up my sign that read "Convict Karl Rove for Contempt". I didn't yell
because I would
have interrupted people who included victims of this bad system. I would
not condone
kicking her out for holding a sign or wearing a tshirt that stated her
opinion but when we
have an already contentious bunch of GOP whiners, it's asking for it when a
person screams out after being duly warned. I support Cindy and have seen her
several times
including when she was at Crawford but I do not support this. She was
warned and knew
the consequences if Mr. Conyers followed up his stated request for no
interruptions.
Peace and Love to you and yours.......
Melinda Iley-Dohn
Read a Blog- A gulity pleasure and You can learn! Leave your opinion so
they can know you were there too!
http://johnmccainis bushlite. blogspot. com/ - http://slaverynever
existed.com/
http://texaslovesob ama.blogspot. com/ - http://muckraker- gg.blogspot. com/
Kevin White <cuitlacoche1@ yahoo.com> wrote:
The first and only removal so far, other than perhaps our liberty...