weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) (10/11/88)
I read in the Sunday NYT that the tapes have *not* been made public yet. It is still in litigation, and some court has just ruled 2-1 to not release them. The "1" here was one Douglas A Ginsburg. I don't recall if that is the same name as Reagan's `pothead' of a nominee, let alone if it's his court. But just in case it is, I thought I'd mention it. ucbvax!garnet!weemba Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
ken@nsc.nsc.com (Ken Trant) (10/11/88)
Obnoxious Student says:
% I read in the Sunday NYT that the tapes have *not* been made public
% yet. It is still in litigation, and some court has just ruled 2-1
% to not release them.
%
% The "1" here was one Douglas A Ginsburg. I don't recall if that is
% the same name as Reagan's `pothead' of a nominee, let alone if it's
% his court. But just in case it is, I thought I'd mention it.
Mr. Wiener
Obviously one thing has a lot to do with the other. It would seem you
disagree with the court and want the tape released and in the next breath
you grind on the only judge to support your position.
How come I am not surprised by this. :-(
Ken
--
PATH= Second star to the right, {...Ken Trant...}
and straight on till morning
"Official Sponsor, US Olympic Team" {...Merrill Lynch Realty...}
415-651-3131 *:-) 408-721-8158weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) (10/12/88)
In article <6939@nsc.nsc.com>, ken@nsc (Ken Trant) writes: > Obviously one thing has a lot to do with the other. It would seem you >disagree with the court and want the tape released and in the next breath >you grind on the only judge to support your position. I don't how I gave you this impression. Nor do I care. ucbvax!garnet!weemba Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
dave@viper.Lynx.MN.Org (David Messer) (10/13/88)
In article <6939@nsc.nsc.com> ken@nsc.nsc.com (Ken Trant) writes: >Obnoxious Student says: > >% I read in the Sunday NYT that the tapes have *not* been made public >% yet. It is still in litigation, and some court has just ruled 2-1 >% to not release them. >% >% The "1" here was one Douglas A Ginsburg. I don't recall if that is >% the same name as Reagan's `pothead' of a nominee, let alone if it's >% his court. But just in case it is, I thought I'd mention it. > >Mr. Wiener > > Obviously one thing has a lot to do with the other. It would seem you >disagree with the court and want the tape released and in the next breath >you grind on the only judge to support your position. > > How come I am not surprised by this. :-( > > Ken I never thought that I would defend anything a certain weemba said but -- read his posting carefully. He never gave an opinion on either the court decision or Judge Ginsburg. All he stated was facts. -- If you can't convince | David Messer - (dave@Lynx.MN.Org) them, confuse them. | Lynx Data Systems -- Harry S Truman | | amdahl --!bungia!viper!dave | hpda / Copyright 1988 David Messer -- All Rights Reserved This work may be freely copied. Any restrictions on redistribution of this work are prohibited.
fiddler%concertina@Sun.COM (Steve Hix) (10/13/88)
In article <15326@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) writes: > In article <6939@nsc.nsc.com>, ken@nsc (Ken Trant) writes: > > Obviously one thing has a lot to do with the other. It would seem you > >disagree with the court and want the tape released and in the next breath > >you grind on the only judge to support your position. > > I don't how I gave you this impression. Nor do I care. Then why respond?
weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) (10/13/88)
In article <72695@sun.uucp>, fiddler%concertina (Steve Hix) writes: >In article <15326@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) writes: >> I don't how I gave you this impression. Nor do I care. >Then why respond? I do not care how Ken Trant got his impression. I do care somewhat about ridiculous views being attributed to me. duhhhh... ucbvax!garnet!weemba Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
dave@viper.Lynx.MN.Org (David Messer) (10/15/88)
In article <15414@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) writes: >In article <72695@sun.uucp>, fiddler%concertina (Steve Hix) writes: >>In article <15326@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) writes: >>> I don't how I gave you this impression. Nor do I care. > >>Then why respond? > >I do not care how Ken Trant got his impression. I do care somewhat >about ridiculous views being attributed to me. duhhhh... > >ucbvax!garnet!weemba Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720 Then why do you include your .signature file? :-) -- If you can't convince | David Messer - (dave@Lynx.MN.Org) them, confuse them. | Lynx Data Systems -- Harry S Truman | | amdahl --!bungia!viper!dave | hpda / Copyright 1988 David Messer -- All Rights Reserved This work may be freely copied. Any restrictions on redistribution of this work are prohibited.
daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Owner of Many System Processes) (10/16/88)
(Bunch of stuff deleted) From: mmmckechnie@tiger.waterloo.edu (Mindgamer.) Path: tiger!mmmckechnie > >>> I don't how I gave you this impression. Nor do I care. > > > >>Then why respond? > > > >I do not care how Ken Trant got his impression. I do care somewhat > >about ridiculous views being attributed to me. duhhhh... > > > >ucbvax!garnet!weemba Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720 > > Then why do you include your .signature file? :-) > -- It seems to me as I try to find some significance to this posting that I have had to put up with several of these stupid questions. If you have questions that are related directly to one person and ONLY one person then why don't you just post DIRECTLY TO THEM instead of taking up my time. Unamused.
tml@druhi.ATT.COM (Tim Larison) (10/18/88)
In article <9098@watdragon.waterloo.edu>, daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Owner of Many System Processes) writes: > (Bunch of stuff deleted) > From: mmmckechnie@tiger.waterloo.edu (Mindgamer.) > Path: tiger!mmmckechnie > > > >>> I don't how I gave you this impression. Nor do I care. > > > > > >>Then why respond? > > > > <more words deleted> I feel like I walked into the middle of an argument. This isn't what got my attention, but the subject line did. What is allegedly on the Challenger tapes that NASA doesn't want the public to hear? Is there more dialog beyond the "uh-oh" uttered by the copilot (as he realized the shuttle was in big trouble)? Has anybody heard any speculation as to what was said by the crew on these tapes? Tim Larison att!druhi!tml