klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) (01/30/86)
In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) writes: OOPS! Obvious Typo: > Space Shuttle Children's Fund > Anerican Security Bank > Box 0150 > Washington, DC 20055 > Should read: Space Shuttle Children's Fund American Security Bank Box 0150 Washington, DC 20055
felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) (02/03/86)
In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes: > > A trust fund has been established by the American Security > Bank in Washington DC. The funds gathered are to be used > to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7 > astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle. Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund for the astronauts' children? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Francois Felix INGRAND (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-( \ | / UUCP: ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!lifia!felix EDIKA \|/ > ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!imag!felix ( O: ) /|\ > Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed here are mine... / | \ Please don't tell my employer...
hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) (02/04/86)
In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes: >In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes: >> >> A trust fund has been established by the American Security >> Bank in Washington DC. The funds gathered are to be used >> to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7 >> astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle. > >Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >for the astronauts' children? > >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >Francois Felix INGRAND (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-( \ | / [flame on, 104%] The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a fund for the families of deceased astronauts. They sacrificed their private lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind our most visible heroes. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the United States we like to take care of our own. -dave the Dream is Alive -- David Hsu Communication & Signal Processing Lab, EE Department <disclaimer> University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 hsu@eneevax.umd.edu {seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!eneevax!hsu "They were the elite, the vanguard of progress. They would take mankind to the heights...and perhaps beyond." -Arthur C. Clarke, Childhood's End
rcj@burl.UUCP (Curtis Jackson) (02/04/86)
In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes: >[flame on, 104%] >The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a >fund for the families of deceased astronauts. They sacrificed their private >lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end >they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some >of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind >our most visible heroes. > > /* another vicious attack followed here */ > I tried this earlier, let me try again: The phrase "The Dream is Alive" describes a real-life phenomenon. The astronauts did not "sacrifice" their personal lives because, as you hinted above, their families lived the Dream, too. That is evident in their unanimous reaction that the Dream must continue despite Challenger. The families, as I pointed out before, do *not* need your money. Their Dream, the Dream that they as families sacrificed so much for, the Dream that is still alive in their hearts despite their tragic loss -- this Dream is what needs your money, your effort, your voice, your vote, and (most of all), your heart. And mine. You write documentation 'til 5am and you can get *real* mushy, too. -- The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291) alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj ...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!rcj
dee@cca.UUCP (Donald Eastlake) (02/04/86)
Of course all the astronauts government provided life insurance,
except for Christa MacAuliffe (sp?). Also Llyods of London offers
all astronausts a free $1,000,000 life insurance policy for each
launch and Christa is the only one of the seven to take them up on
it. But it is a free country and how can you stop people who want
to do something from setting up a Trust fund for the astronauts
children?
--
+1 617-492-8860 Donald E. Eastlake, III
ARPA: dee@CCA-UNIX usenet: {decvax,linus}!cca!deewill@anasazi.UUCP (Will Fuller) (02/04/86)
In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes: >In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes: >> >> A trust fund has been established by the American Security >> Bank in Washington DC. The funds gathered are to be used >> to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7 >> astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle. > >Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >for the astronauts' children? > >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >Francois Felix INGRAND (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-( \ | / >UUCP: ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!lifia!felix EDIKA \|/ > > ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!imag!felix ( O: ) > /|\ > >Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed here are mine... / | \ > Please don't tell my employer... "Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?" - E. Scrooge -- William H. Fuller {decvax|ihnp4|hao}!noao!terak!anasazi!will
felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) (02/04/86)
>From imag!vmucnam!mcvax!bu-cs!dml Tue Feb 4 06:05:51 1986 >From me >>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>for the astronauts' children? > >I feel very sorry for you. I hope that there are not many people >like you that do not care or have sympthay for those who have >suffered a great loss. I post the response on the net before our "transmission cable" became hot. First my question was serious, I do not know very well the american Social System but I feel very sorry too, to think that you have to make a fund to help these childrens. Second, these childrens, which suffered a great loss indeed, and you could be sure that I have sympathy for them, looks for me like the childrens or people which loose parents or friends in such a catastrophe. The tomorow of the shuttle catastrophe, there were a Airplane Crash in South America: 27 deads... Be sure that I have a lot of sympathy for them too. But Medias seem to have forgotten them... And American Fund too. Third, Do you really think that it is money that these childrens need? Do you really think that sympathy can only be Dollars. Excuse me but I feel sorry for you, to see that the only think that you can do for them is to make a Fund. I understand that we can make a fund like AFRICA AID, of "LES RESTAURANTS DU COEUR" in France. But here, is it the best solution? I doubt. I apologize for my poor English, and my response would be more precise if it was written in french. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Francois Felix INGRAND Pourquoi tant de haine... UUCP: ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!lifia!felix EDIKA ...{mcvax,vmucnam}!imag!felix
wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) (02/05/86)
In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes: >In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes: >>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes: >>> >>> A trust fund has been established by the American Security >>> Bank in Washington DC. The funds gathered are to be used >>> to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7 >>> astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle. >> >>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>for the astronauts' children? >> >>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >>Francois Felix INGRAND (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-( \ | / > >[flame on, 104%] >The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a >fund for the families of deceased astronauts. They sacrificed their private >lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end >they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some >of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind >our most visible heroes. > >Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the >United States we like to take care of our own. Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space. After all, they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but a satellite into orbit.
craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) (02/05/86)
In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes: >In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes: >>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes: >>> >>> A trust fund has been established by the American Security >>> Bank in Washington DC. The funds gathered are to be used >>> to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7 >>> astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle. >> >>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>for the astronauts' children? >> >>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >>Francois Felix INGRAND (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-( \ | / > >[flame on, 104%] >The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a >fund for the families of deceased astronauts. They sacrificed their private >lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end >they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some >of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind >our most visible heroes. > I feel you must have misunderstood the comment from Francois Ingrand. He means that it must surely be the responsibility of the Goverment (who are responsible for the program on which the 7 died) rather than the responsibility of the people who so spectacularly watched them die. Yes it was a terrible tragedy and yes it is nice of you to think of the children. It was a job - with its risks, what about the guy who dies on the oil rig supplying energy to the nation or the Red Indian who died because he complained about selling millions of square miles of land for trifles ? >Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the >United States we like to take care of our own. > Perhaps you should see the comment above, when you supply free education, free medical care and goverment subsidised housing then you can be insulting, until then you are not taking care of your own at all. It is a great shame that inorder to move the people to 'taking care of their own' the people have to see 7 people die in an explosion on Television. People die all the time pushing forward frontiers and working for a greater ideal, dieing on TV shouldn't be the pre-requisite for acknoledgement. Craig. -- UUCP: ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig| Post: University of Lancaster, DARPA: craig%lancs.comp@ucl-cs | Department of Computing, JANET: craig@uk.ac.lancs.comp | Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK. Phone: +44 524 65201 Ext. 4146 | LA1 4YR Project: Cosmos Distributed Operating Systems Research
aglew@ccvaxa.UUCP (02/06/86)
>>>for the astronauts' children? >> >>I feel very sorry for you. I hope that there are not many people >>like you that do not care or have sympthay for those who have >>suffered a great loss. > >I post the response on the net before our "transmission cable" became hot. > >First my question was serious, I do not know very well the american Social >System but I feel very sorry too, to think that you have to make a fund to help >these childrens. Please try to understand, Americans, that people from other countries may be more than a bit surprised to find out that some of the astronaut's families will receive very little indemnity from NASA, and that someone does not automatically get up in Congress to vote them a living. But people from other countries are also surprised to see newsitems on American TV about people living in a cave in a park in Manhattan, or having nowhere to live at all. Somebody had better take care of your own.
jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (02/06/86)
In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes: >In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes: >> A trust fund has been established ... >Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >for the astronauts' children? No, Francois. The hearts of some Americans are so large, that they wish to do so. This is a voluntary trust: unlike Social Security and taxes, no one need contribute who does not wish to. Assez bien? -- Joe Yao hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}
credmond@watmath.UUCP (Chris Redmond) (02/06/86)
>>>> >>>> A trust fund has been established by the American Security >>>> Bank in Washington DC. The funds gathered are to be used >>>> to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7 >>>> astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle. >>> >>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>>for the astronauts' children? >>> >> >>United States we like to take care of our own. > > Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that > sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space. After all, > they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but > a satellite into orbit. More to the point, don't blame him: he lives in a country (France) where the ASSUMPTION is that bereaved children will be taken care of from public funds, and there's no need to start a special collection.
wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly) (02/06/86)
In article <328@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes: >First my question was serious, I do not know very well the american Social >System but I feel very sorry too, to think that you have to make a fund to help >these childrens. First of all, I'm responding to your comments with my own personal views and feelings about American society and the reasons why we do things. You will no doubt find that some or even many Americans will argue with what I have to say in general or in this particular instance. Whatever the shortcomings and limitations of our current social welfare programs, the suggestion that a fund be set up for the children was made in a spirit of compassion for the families involved and as a living memorial for seven people who seem to many of us Americans to be heroes. Perhaps we're talking about cultural differences here, Francois. Americans frequently contribute to one charity or another when a loved one or a friend's loved one dies or make a contribution in memory of a national figure. This is neither right nor wrong, it's simply the way we Americans are. We don't "have to" set up a fund to help these children because social welfare programs, insurance, etc. won't provide for their futures; we choose to set up such a fund and contribute to it as a celebration of the astronauts' sacrifices and as a celebration of our solidarity as a people in the face of tragedy. >Second, these childrens, which suffered a great loss indeed, and you could be >sure that I have sympathy for them, looks for me like the childrens or people >which loose parents or friends in such a catastrophe. The tomorow of the >shuttle catastrophe, there were a Airplane Crash in South America: 27 deads... >Be sure that I have a lot of sympathy for them too. But Medias seem to have >forgotten them... And American Fund too. The media in this country pay more attention to the shuttle tragedy than to the crash in South America because it's more newsworthy to citizens of our country. I'm sure the South American crash received a lot of coverage in South American countries. And I'm sure you Frenchmen provide greater coverage to stories that are of particular interest to the French people or that touch the French people in a special way. Human tragedy is human tragedy, whether it happens to national figures like the astronauts or to the faceless people living in the house down the street. In spite of the seemingly routine nature of space shuttle flights, I think many Americans have supported the space program, have felt that the peaceful exploration of space is a national priority, and have viewed the astronauts as ambassador/heroes. So the death of these seven people touched us in a special way. >Third, Do you really think that it is money that these childrens need? >Do you really think that sympathy can only be Dollars. Excuse me but I >feel sorry for you, to see that the only think that you can do for them is to >make a Fund. I understand that we can make a fund like AFRICA AID, of "LES >RESTAURANTS DU COEUR" in France. But here, is it the best solution? I doubt. The creation of a memorial fund, as I've pointed out, springs from an American tradition of people helping other people at a grass-roots level. At least that's the way it seems to me as an American citizen who grew up in the heartland. When a neighbor dies of a heart attack, you make a contribution to a medical charity that supports research into heart disease in the neighbor's name. If you think this is evidence of a meanness of spirit in the American people or a poverty of solutions, you don't understand what we are as a people. -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly
chapman@miro.berkeley.edu.BERKELEY.EDU (Brent Chapman) (02/06/86)
In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes: >In article <325@lifia.UUCP> felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes: >>In article <221@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP writes: >>> >>> A trust fund has been established by the American Security >>> Bank in Washington DC. The funds gathered are to be used >>> to provide financial assistance to the children of the 7 >>> astronauts killed in the explosion of the space shuttle. >> >>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>for the astronauts' children? >> >>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >>Francois Felix INGRAND (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-( \ | / > >[flame on, 104%] >The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a >fund for the families of deceased astronauts. They sacrificed their private >lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end >they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some >of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind >our most visible heroes. > >Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the >United States we like to take care of our own. > >-dave >the Dream is Alive >-- I'm in one hundred (and four :-)) percent agreement with Dave. Mr. Ingrand, are the people of France so poor (and uncaring) that your _government_ would have to create a fund under similar circumstances? Brent Chapman chapman@miro.berkeley.edu ucbvax!miro!chapman
barmar@mit-eddie.UUCP (Barry Margolin) (02/07/86)
In article <505@eneevax.UUCP> hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) writes: >The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a >fund for the families of deceased astronauts. They sacrificed their private >lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; in the end >they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some >of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind >our most visible heroes. > >Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the >United States we like to take care of our own. Hmm, did we create such a trust fund for the families of deceased draftees in the Viet Nam War? Or how about the families of Americans killed by terrorists, who were used as unwitting representatives of the US. At least the astronauts died admirably, pursuing their dreams, and they were aware that there were such risks. Yes, I was horrified at the disaster. However, I am bothered by the fact that the entire country seems to think this is the worst disaster in history. Most airline disasters kill more people, and victims of such accidents generally did not expect trouble, yet we do not agonize over them. I do not mean to sound unfeeling, I just wish to be realistic about this. -- Barry Margolin ARPA: barmar@MIT-Multics UUCP: ..!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar
guy@slu70.UUCP (Guy M. Smith) (02/07/86)
In article <469@ecn-pc.UUCP>, wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) writes: > they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but > a satellite into orbit. How do you but (butt?) a satellite into orbit. Is this what a ram drive is all about:-).
galenr@shark.UUCP (Galen Redfield) (02/08/86)
[I delete some re-quoting for brevity] In an amazing display of diplomacy and insight, Dave Hsu writes (or rants): >Francois Felix INGRAND writes: >>klr@hadron.UUCP writes: >>> A trust fund has been established... >>> to provide financial assistance to the children... >>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>for the astronauts' children? >>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >>Francois Felix INGRAND (-: Pourquoi tant de haine... :-( \ | / > >[flame on, 104%] >The shape of our `Social Budget' is completely irrelevant to the creation of a >fund for the families of deceased astronauts. It's true! We'll take up any noble cause at the drop of a hat. It's the American Way to try solving any problem, even bereavement, by pouring money on it. And nobody better criticize us for it! > They sacrificed their private >lives just to pursue the common dream of all mankind to explore; Sure they did. They didn't care if anyone even noticed. They did it for totally selfless reasons. They didn't think it would be heroic, exciting, or interesting. They weren't even thinking about succeeding. They just wanted to pursue the common dream of all mankind. (I did not realize that starving people in Ethiopia wanted to explore. Thanks for pointing that out, Dave.) > in the end >they parted with much more than their privacy and it just so happens that some >of us who remain earthbound feel the need to thank the unseen families behind >our most visible heroes. Yes, thank you, unseen families, for losing your loved ones. We really do appreciate it. Thanks a lot, good job. Have some money as a token of our gratitude. Now we'll all feel better. > >Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the >United States we like to take care of our own. > >-dave >the Dream is Alive >-- Boy, Dave, you sure put that French guy in his place. That'll teach him to ask questions on the net about American social conditions! Warm regards, Galen.
ems@amdahl.UUCP (ems) (02/08/86)
In article <328@lifia.UUCP>, felix@lifia.UUCP (Francois Felix INGRAND) writes: > > First my question was serious, I do not know very well the american Social > System but I feel very sorry too, to think that you have to make a fund to help > these childrens. We don't really have a single 'Social System'. It is more like a collection of interacting systems. Insurance is one system (usually privately funded, but often not). Government aid is another. Public funds are yet another. These all tend to work without any coordination between them. Often this means that their actions are either redundant or lacking. In the case of astronauts, since their profession has high risks, private insurance companies would be unwilling to take on those risks without very high payments. I think that NASA provides the 'insurance' that the families would normally be able to purchase. (If someone knows, they may want to explain how this really works.) The comments that "the children don't need the money" imply that there are some form of benefits available to them. The forming of a fund is, as often as not, for the expression of the sympathies of the donors. > (...) > Third, Do you really think that it is money that these childrens need? > Do you really think that sympathy can only be Dollars. Excuse me but I > feel sorry for you, to see that the only think that you can do for them is to > make a Fund. I understand that we can make a fund like AFRICA AID, of "LES > RESTAURANTS DU COEUR" in France. But here, is it the best solution? I doubt. There is little else that most folks can do. I may be on the other side of the continent from them, and I may not be able to contact them, and they might not want to be contacted by several million strangers, but I can show my concern by a donation to a fund. Cash is the universal medium, the children can convert it into whatever form of monument they desire. > > I apologize for my poor English, and my response would be more precise if it > was written in french. > I would like to encourage you to post in your native language. I would have benefitted from (trying) to read it. Prehaps a bi-lingual standard could be addopted: The English version first, as it is the customary language of the net, and the native language following. It would be helpful both as a reference for clarification, and for practice for those of us who are in need of practice for our French (or other language of your choice..) (Not to mention furthering the ideal of a multi-lingual and multi-cultural net/world) -- E. Michael Smith ...!{hplabs,ihnp4,amd,nsc}!amdahl!ems This is the obligatory disclaimer of everything.
gsmith@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Gene Ward Smith) (02/10/86)
In article <469@ecn-pc.UUCP> wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) writes: > Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that > sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space. After all, > they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but > a satellite into orbit. Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any fatalities in thier space program as yet. ucbvax!brahms!gsmith Gene Ward Smith/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720 ucbvax!weyl!gsmith "When Ubizmo talks, people listen."
craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) (02/10/86)
(klr@hadron) >>> A trust fund has been established ... (Francois Felix INGRAND) >>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>for the astronauts' children? (Joseph S. D. Yao) >No, Francois. The hearts of some Americans are so large, that they >wish to do so. This is a voluntary trust: unlike Social Security >and taxes, no one need contribute who does not wish to. Assez bien? Look we are getting racist again, this and other similar postings are begining to look as if people are about to start on the old trans-Atlantic slanging match. It must be at least 2 months since we last did this over net.internat. The different attitudes of people in many European Countries to those of Americans are articles of faith. We believe we are right, you believe that you are right. There appears to be no room for discussion, so we resort to insults - it is very easy to do. Accept one thing -- your beliefs are only right because you believe in them. Many European countries have a history of Socialism and Communism, this has left its mark on us. We believe it is a basic human right to be Educated, to free medical treatment etc... Many people consider the money paid out for space exploration to be a gross waste of money while people are illeterate and starve. I say this in reply to another posting that suggested that the French are Jealous of American space exploration. It's about time we all started realising that we are not the same people - we have different drives and cultural identities, don't force your ideals onto us they don't fit. Craig. -- UUCP: ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig| Post: University of Lancaster, DARPA: craig%lancs.comp@ucl-cs | Department of Computing, JANET: craig@uk.ac.lancs.comp | Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK. Phone: +44 524 65201 Ext. 4146 | LA1 4YR Project: Cosmos Distributed Operating Systems Research
budd@boring.uucp (Tim Budd) (02/10/86)
>>Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the >>United States we like to take care of our own. As an American currently living in Europe, I find statements such as this almost painfully embarrassing. When one compares the health care system in Europe, the support for housewifes and children, and so on and on to the social programs in the United States, it is sadly all to clear how poor a job America does of ``taking care of its own''. --tim budd
pete@stc.co.uk (02/10/86)
Summary: Expires: Sender: Followup-To: Distribution: Keywords: Xref: ukc net.space:1995 net.columbia:844 net.sf-lovers:7042 net.followup:2079 Xpath: ukc eagle In article <469@ecn-pc.UUCP> wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) writes: > Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that > sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space. After all, > they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but > a satellite into orbit. Oh dear. 1: A comparison of the relative sizes of France and the USA makes it pretty obvious that Ariane is a considerable achievement. 2: Why should the USA and the USSR have it all their own way in space? 3: Look to your laurels; the Japanese are right at your heels Right Now on space technology - 2 of the Halley's Comet probes are from Japan. (and Giotto, the best bet, is European!) It seems to me that this discussion belongs in net.politics, 'cos what we're talking about is the difference in political philosophy between a laissez-faire system and a paternalist system; and whether one leads to the abandonment of the weak to their own devices (the 'Sod you, I'm all right' system) and the other to the stifling of initiative (the 'Don't worry son, the State will look after you, just be good' system). Please can the discussion be carried on elsewhere? 7 brave humans died on the Challenger; we all respect their courage, but some of us are wondering why you have to die live on TV to raise the conscience of a nation. BTW, I read Robert Forward's 'Dragon's Egg' over the weekend and got a shock in the first few pages - is he on the net and what do they know at Hughes and JPL that we don't? -- Peter Kendell <pete@stc.UUCP> ...!mcvax!ukc!stc!pete `When your achievements match your expectations, it's time to move on.'
hom@uvacs.UUCP (Hugues O. Morel) (02/10/86)
I don't see what France has to do with this, and I want you to know that some other Frenchmen out there find the idea of a fund for the astronauts' children a very good one. As a matter of fact, the american space program is leading the way for the progress of all the other nations of the world and we share its victories and sometimes its failures in the same way you do, believe it or not. You may be proud to know that the pionner spirit is one of the first characteristics that come to our mind when we think of the USA ... Hugues Morel A Frenchman at the University of Virginia
kgd@rlvd.UUCP (Keith Dancey) (02/11/86)
In article <981@dcl-cs.UUCP> craig@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Craig Wylie) writes: >>>> A trust fund has been established ... > >>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>>for the astronauts' children? > >>No, Francois. The hearts of some Americans are so large, that they... > >Many European countries have a history of Socialism and Communism, this has >left its mark on us. We believe it is a basic human right to be Educated, to >free medical treatment etc... Many people consider the money paid out >for space exploration to be a gross waste of money while people are illeterate ---------- How true! :-) >and starve. I say this in reply to another posting that suggested that the >French are Jealous of American space exploration. It's about time we >all started realising that we are not the same people - we have different >drives and cultural identities, don't force your ideals onto us they don't >fit. > -- Keith Dancey, UUCP: ..!mcvax!ukc!rlvd!kgd Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 0QX JANET: K.DANCEY@uk.ac.rl Tel: (0235) 21900 ext 5716
ron@brl-smoke.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (02/12/86)
> Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember > Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any > fatalities in thier space program as yet. > Eh, if you consider the people who put up Sputnik (the Soviets, remember?) to be Europeans, then, it is not pretty neat, because they have had fatalities in their program as well. -Ron
jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (02/12/86)
In article <981@dcl-cs.UUCP> craig@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Craig Wylie) writes: >(klr@hadron) >>>> A trust fund has been established ... >(Francois Felix INGRAND) >>>Is the Social Budget of USA so poor that American people must create a fund >>>for the astronauts' children? >(Joseph S. D. Yao <jsdy@hadron>) >>No, Francois. The hearts of some Americans are so large, that they >>wish to do so. This is a voluntary trust: unlike Social Security >>and taxes, no one need contribute who does not wish to. Assez bien? > >Look we are getting racist again, this and other similar postings >are begining to look as if people are about to start on the old >trans-Atlantic slanging match. It must be at least 2 months since >we last did this over net.internat. Craig, I'm quite distressed that you could read the above as slanging anybody, or being at all racist. Please read it again, without any prejudgments about Americans being whatever. All I said was that some Americans specifically wanted to help some other people. It is quite clear that this faculty is in no wise limited to either Americans or to space children. Examples of the first you are possibly more familiar with than I, and include the recent benefit concerts for the starving folk in Africa, much like the one in the States. Examples of the latter can be heard all over here, in the almost incessant benefits being given for the poor, the ill, the disabled, the homeless, or practically any distressed group one can imagine. This seems to be related to the American brand of socialism, which is to say that those who have often (and unfortunately not always) will make a point of giving to some central fund to make sure that those who have not, might. -- Joe Yao hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}
craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) (02/12/86)
In article <1076@rlvd.UUCP> kgd@rlvd.UUCP (Keith Dancey) writes: >>free medical treatment etc... Many people consider the money paid out >>for space exploration to be a gross waste of money while people are illeterate > ---------- >How true! :-) > Repeat after me :- I must learn how to spell before making a complete arse of myself 100 times Craig. -- UUCP: ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig| Post: University of Lancaster, DARPA: craig%lancs.comp@ucl-cs | Department of Computing, JANET: craig@uk.ac.lancs.comp | Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK. Phone: +44 524 65201 Ext. 4146 | LA1 4YR Project: Cosmos Distributed Operating Systems Research
wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (02/13/86)
In article <981@dcl-cs.UUCP> craig@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Craig Wylie) writes: >Many European countries have a history of Socialism and Communism, this has >left its mark on us. We believe it is a basic human right to be Educated, to >free medical treatment etc... What makes you think many Americans don't feel this way? >Many people consider the money paid out >for space exploration to be a gross waste of money while people are illeterate >and starve. And many people in this country (including some of us who count ourselves on the left side of the political spectrum) don't. You folks in Britain support a figurehead Royal Family. Is that a gross waste of money to you? >I say this in reply to another posting that suggested that the >French are Jealous of American space exploration. So the person who made this statement was insensitive and boorish. S/he certainly doesn't speak for all Americans. >It's about time we >all started realising that we are not the same people - we have different >drives and cultural identities, don't force your ideals onto us they don't >fit. Fine, as long as Europeans are willing to refrain from forcing THEIR ideas on us as Americans. At least that's how some of us took Francois' posting. I've often had Europeans visiting this country make rude comments about the "American way of life." The Ugly American concept needs to be extended to include the Ugly European, the Ugly Asian, ... And I agree with the recent poster who suggested this be moved to another group; it has little to do with net.space anymore. - Cheers, Bill Ingogly
wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) (02/13/86)
In article <805@bute.tcom.stc.co.uk> pete@stc.UUCP (Peter Kendell) writes: >In article <469@ecn-pc.UUCP> wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (Tex) writes: >> Don't blame him, it is probably difficult to live in a country that >> sits on the sidelines and watches while we explore space. After all, >> they think it is pretty neat that they have a booster that can but >> a satellite into orbit. > > Oh dear. I didn't know people still said that in public. > > 1: A comparison of the relative sizes of France and the USA > makes it pretty obvious that Ariane is a considerable > achievement. Of course Ariane is not totally French - it is the product of the Euro- pean Space Agency, of which France is the most active participant. > > 2: Why should the USA and the USSR have it all their own way > in space? I give up, why? I certainly never said they should. > > 3: Look to your laurels; the Japanese are right at your heels > Right Now on space technology - 2 of the Halley's Comet > probes are from Japan. (and Giotto, the best bet, is > European!) There are some pretty good reasons the US did not send a probe to Halley. One of the major ones was funding, of course. Another major one is the Halley did not present itself as a particularly interesting comet due to its approach relative to the Sun. What the US has proposed is the (I probably have this somewhat garbled) Tempel 2 Comet Rendezvous Mission. I don't know what its status is since the Challenger malfunctioned. This probe is designed to go out to the asteroid belt (doing a close in asteroid fly-by in the process, as a result of which, I think the mission has had appended Asteroid Fly-by to its name, I believe), pick up Tempel 2 and stay with it as it approaches the Sun, reaches perihelion and then goes back to aphelion. It will be in close proximity to Tempel 2 for several MONTHS. The Halley probes will be in close proximity for several minutes, or maybe hours depending what you want to call "close," due to their high angle of interception. Comet researchers generally agree that the Tempel 2 mission is of much higher scientific significance than the Halley missions, because the comet will be observed going from a nearly virgin state, then to a highly excited state and back again. Of course, history is not rich with Tempel 2 lore, so this mission does not have the allure of a Halley mission. And now, a message to our French speaking viewers: J'ai poste une article il y a deux semaines, un peu pres, disant que la France n'est pas un des champions de l'exploration de l'espace. Je crois exactement le contraire. Je l'ai ecrit en reponse a un francais qui a ecrit une article qui etait, a mon avis, insultant, surtout juste apres le disastre Challenger. Si je vous ai insulte, je m'excuse. Je n'ai que admiration pour l'ESA. Excusez mon francais, s'il vous plait. > > 7 brave humans died on the Challenger; we all respect their > courage, but some of us are wondering why you have to die live > on TV to raise the conscience of a nation. If I recall correctly, the Apollo One Crew did not die "live on TV," and the conscience of the nation was still raised.
mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR) (02/14/86)
In article <850@brl-smoke.ARPA> ron@brl-smoke.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) writes: >> Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember >> Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any >> fatalities in thier space program as yet. >> >Eh, if you consider the people who put up Sputnik (the Soviets, remember?) >to be Europeans, then, it is not pretty neat, because they have had >fatalities in their program as well. > >-Ron Aside from which, if you don't consider the Soviets to be European, then they have also not yet had any astronauts in their space program (except as passengers on the shuttle). It's hard to have fatalities when there are no people. --MKR
goddard@rochester.UUCP (Nigel Goddard) (02/14/86)
In article <260@hadron.UUCP> jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) writes: >or practically any distressed group one can imagine. This seems >to be related to the American brand of socialism, which is to >say that those who have often (and unfortunately not always) >will make a point of giving to some central fund to make sure >that those who have not, might. You seem to be confusing socialism with charity. This example underlines the fundamental difference between our European and North American contributors, a difference subtle but profound which has lead to acrimonious exchanges over the Challenger fund. As a European currently living in the U.S.A. it has become clear to me that the major seperation is over the question of the individual versus the collective. That Joseph Yao can call the above formulation a 'brand of socialism' is but an example of the difficulty people here have thinking in terms of the collective. He would have the individual retaining the right to decide whether or not to provide for those in need. In the the U.S.A. this is seen to be an indication of a caring society that takes care of its own (at least if the needy are given to some of the time). From a European persepective (at least mine) this is no more than charity, a word which has severe negative connotations as a social policy. Any collective approach, where the collective (society as a whole) decides whether or not to provide for those in need is seen here as a fundamental attack on individual rights and liberties, encroachment of government to areas outside its proper sphere. Again from my European viewpoint such a collective framework (at least to some extent) is not only necessary but entirely obvious and natural, and poses no threats to my rights or liberties, and indeed is a proper activity of government (being the representative of society). Now one can argue the rights and wrongs of both viewpoints, but my purpose here is to elucidate the basis for the constant misunderstandings apparent in this issue. After many discussions here in the U.S. it seems to me that just as many in Europe do not see the limitations of their democratic institutions and do not understand an emphasis on indivdual rights, many in the U.S.A. do not see the limitations of their power as individuals and do not understand the nature of the collective. These viewpoints are so deeply rooted in historical experience and culture that we will not come to any consensus and would be well advised to accept that other peoples see the world in other ways. The original query from France that sparked this whole debate could have been taken at face value as a question from another culture, rather than as an attack on the U.S. For the sake of clarity I have had to make gross generalisations about U.S. and European attitudes. Of course there is a wide spectrum of opinion on both sides of the Atlantic, but the categorisation is useful. Cheers Nigel Internet: goddard@rochester.arpa UUCP: {decvax, allegra, seismo, cmc12}!rochester!goddard Phone: [USA] (716) 275-5766 School: Department of Computer Science; University of Rochester; Rochester, NY 14627 -- Internet: goddard@rochester.arpa UUCP: {decvax, allegra, seismo, cmc12}!rochester!goddard Phone: [USA] (716) 275-5766 School: Department of Computer Science; University of Rochester; Rochester, NY 14627
jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (02/17/86)
I had thought I was more or less quoting Alexis de Toqueville,
another European in l'ESA, in referring to America's peculiar
brand of socialism. (You might call it "statistical socialism.")
Prob'ly misquoted. I was educated partly in an English Benedictine
monastery (here in the States), and know something about the
individual power of the collective versus the collective power
of individuals. I should, perhaps, have thought that the people
to whom I was responding knew less than I assumed; but the
question seemed to presume some pre-knowledge of American
social systems.
I wish to declare, as a result of several postings, that I did
not wish to insult anybody with my original posting, but merely
to respond to what appeared to be an insult from one who should
know better. Later postings showed that he was not, in fact,
as aware of these differences as I had erroneously assumed, and
that therefore no insult had been intended.
CAN WE STOP THIS NOW PLEASE?
--
Joe Yao hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (02/17/86)
>>> Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember >>> Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any >>> fatalities in thier space program as yet. >>> >>Eh, if you consider the people who put up Sputnik (the Soviets, remember?) >>to be Europeans, then, it is not pretty neat, because they have had >>fatalities in their program as well. >> >>-Ron > > Aside from which, if you don't consider the Soviets to be European, >then they have also not yet had any astronauts in their space program (except >as passengers on the shuttle). It's hard to have fatalities when there are >no people. The French flew a cosmonaut on a Soviet flight well before we allowed allies on ours. -- James C. Armstrong, Jnr. {ihnp4,cbosgd,akgua}!abnji!nyssa "But Doctor, we're on that island!" "Oh my word!" who said them, what story?
hsu@eneevax.UUCP (Dave Hsu) (02/18/86)
In article <263@hadron.UUCP> jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) writes: > >I wish to declare, as a result of several postings, that I did >not wish to insult anybody with my original posting, but merely >to respond to what appeared to be an insult from one who should >know better. Later postings showed that he was not, in fact, >as aware of these differences as I had erroneously assumed, and >that therefore no insult had been intended. > >CAN WE STOP THIS NOW PLEASE? >-- > > Joe Yao hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP} ditto. -dave -- David Hsu Communication & Signal Processing Lab, EE Department <disclaimer> University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 hsu@eneevax.umd.edu {seismo,allegra}!umcp-cs!eneevax!hsu "Godzilla has been spotted in Sector 5!"
mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR) (02/18/86)
In article <1129@abnji.UUCP> nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) writes: >>>> Do I detect a hint of chauvinism here? Does anybody still remember >>>> Sputnik? I think it is prtty neat that the Europeans havn't had any >>>> fatalities in thier space program as yet. >>>> >>>Eh, if you consider the people who put up Sputnik (the Soviets, remember?) >>>to be Europeans, then, it is not pretty neat, because they have had >>>fatalities in their program as well. >>> >>>-Ron >> >> Aside from which, if you don't consider the Soviets to be European, >>then they have also not yet had any astronauts in their space program (except >>as passengers on the shuttle). It's hard to have fatalities when there are >>no people. > >The French flew a cosmonaut on a Soviet flight well before we >allowed allies on ours. >-- >James C. Armstrong, Jnr. {ihnp4,cbosgd,akgua}!abnji!nyssa Yes, but being guest ballast on someone else's flight is not the same. If that French astronaut had gone up in smoke, I doubt that too many people would have blamed the French space program, except to the extent that "he shouldn't have been going to space to begin with." --MKR
roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) (02/18/86)
In article <6769@boring.UUCP> budd@boring.UUCP (Tim Budd) writes: >>>Perhaps you are unfamiliar with such things, Monsieur Ingrand, but here in the >>>United States we like to take care of our own. > >As an American currently living in Europe, I find statements such as this >almost painfully embarrassing. When one compares the health care system in >Europe, the support for housewifes and children, and so on and on to the >social programs in the United States, it is sadly all to clear how poor a >job America does of ``taking care of its own''. > >--tim budd The point was that AMERICA doesn't HAVE to, because AMERICANS do. -- *** Speak for the company? Naaaah, it's hard enough speaking for ME! *** ... "What were you expecting, rock'n'roll?" Roger B.A. Klorese Celerity Computing, 40 Speen St., Framingham, MA 01701, (617) 872-1772 UUCP: seismo!harvard!bu-cs!celtics!roger ARPA: roger%bu-cs!celtics@harvard.ARPA
ed@wgivax.UUCP (02/21/86)
Is there a newsgroup which discusses technical and commercial aspects of the shuttle, rather than social/geopolitical aspects? If not, wouldn't it be useful to discriminate between those disparate concerns?
kgd@rlvd.UUCP (Keith Dancey) (02/21/86)
In article <967@celtics.UUCP> roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) writes: >>As an American currently living in Europe, I find statements such as this >>almost painfully embarrassing. When one compares the health care system in >>Europe, the support for housewifes and children, and so on and on to the >>social programs in the United States, it is sadly all to clear how poor a >>job America does of ``taking care of its own''. >> >>--tim budd > >The point was that AMERICA doesn't HAVE to, because AMERICANS do. That is a proud boast and Americans are certainly generous people. Does it always work, I wonder? -- Keith Dancey, UUCP: ..!mcvax!ukc!rlvd!kgd Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Chilton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 0QX JANET: K.DANCEY@uk.ac.rl Tel: (0235) 21900 ext 5716
allen@mmm.UUCP (Kurt Allen) (02/24/86)
All of the Challenger Astronauts were covered by insurance policies. Ms McAuliff was covered by a policy for a million dollars in case of a fatal accident. Do her children really need a trust fund ? All in all I really am getting very tired of the emotional attitude that people on this net and in the press are taking. The people in 51L were very aware of the dangers involved and took necessary precautions. Isnt it time for the rest of us to take the same attitude and quit being overly dramatic at a simple fact of life - people die ? -- Kurt W. Allen 3M Center ihnp4!mmm!allen
hijab@cad.UUCP (Raif Hijab) (02/25/86)
In article <971@dcl-cs.UUCP>, craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) writes: > Perhaps you should see the comment above, when you supply free education, > free medical care and goverment subsidised housing then you can > be insulting, until then you are not taking care of your own at all. > Hear! Hear! Just What I have wanted to say.
jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (02/25/86)
In article <1116@rlvd.UUCP> kgd@rlvd.UUCP (Keith Dancey) writes: >In article <967@celtics.UUCP> roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) writes: >>The point was that AMERICA doesn't HAVE to, because AMERICANS do. >That is a proud boast and Americans are certainly generous people. Does it >always work, I wonder? No, unfortunately not. I don't think there's anything we mortals do that always works, eh? That's why we've all got different ways of trying things: because your ways work better than ours -- some- times -- and our ways work better than yours -- sometimes. -- Joe Yao hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}
dls@mtgzz.UUCP (d.l.skran) (02/26/86)
>> >> Summary: Taking Care of Your Own >> Xref: ucbvax net.space:4057 net.columbia:1844 net.followup:3860 >> >> In article <971@dcl-cs.UUCP>, craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) writes: >> > Perhaps you should see the comment above, when you supply free education, >> > free medical care and goverment subsidised housing then you can >> > be insulting, until then you are not taking care of your own at all. >> > >> >> Hear! Hear! Just What I have wanted to say. >> I am astounded that anyone talks about "free" services. Nothing is free. This debate is fundamental to defending space exploration, scientific reserach, artistic endevour, or any non-essential activity. If we must wait until everyone has a college education, or a high school education, or whatever, we will wait FOREVER. If we wait until everyone lives in a palace, or even a small house, we will wait FOREVER. If we wait until everyone has the best possible medical care, we will not only wait FOREVER, but we will be bankrupt almost immediately as we chase an ever higher standard of care. The simple truth is that better housing, better education, and better medical care for all are worthy goals that deserve serious attention. But they do not deserve ALL our attention, or all our efforts. If we do not understand this basic point, we have sold out our children's and grandchildren's future. Dale Skran Speaking for himself
che@ptsfb.UUCP (Mitch Che) (02/28/86)
In article <558@mmm.UUCP> allen@mmm.UUCP (Kurt Allen) writes: > > All in all I really am getting very tired of the emotional attitude > that people on this net and in the press are taking. The people > in 51L were very aware of the dangers involved and took necessary > precautions. Isnt it time for the rest of us to take the same attitude > and quit being overly dramatic at a simple fact of life - people die ? > Oh? It is the nature of most of us to treat death rather "dramatically" with services, memorials, etc. I respect your opinion to ignore this, but my attitude is somewhat different. To paraphrase: "You see, Mr. Allen, I would insist on a decent burial even if it were your body lying back there." -- Mitch Che Pacific Bell --------------------------------------- disclaimer, disclaimer, disclaimer, too (415) 823-2438 uucp: {ihnp4,dual}!ptsfa!ptsfb!che
cyrill@scicom.UUCP (Cyro Lord ) (02/28/86)
In article <967@celtics.UUCP>, roger@celtics.UUCP (Roger Klorese) writes: > > The point was that AMERICA doesn't HAVE to, because AMERICANS do. > -- Well, i'm still waiting to hear about the Childrens Fund for the 250 some odd U.S. Army personal that died in a plane crash on there way home. Of course, they are only just plain folks, most with out college degrees, working without fan fair, out of the press view, without PR, for little money. As for America taking care of it's own, 'Sorry Charlie, only the BEST get to be STARKISSED'. Or if I may, what a bunch of crap.
scott@cstvax.UUCP (Scott Larnach) (02/28/86)
In <267@hadron.UUCP> jsdy@hadron.UUCP says :- > ... I don't think there's anything we mortals > do that always works, eh? That's why we've all got different ways > of trying things: because your ways work better than ours -- some- > times -- and our ways work better than yours -- sometimes. I heartily applaud *somebody* in this discussion who isn't being totally chauvinistic. If you could take the best of Europe, and the best of America, and get them to work together without trying to knife each other in the back all the time, what a team we would have! Most Americans and most Europeans, I think, believe in essentially the same things -- freedom of expression and action within the law being the most important. The source of the tensions between us is not the people, it's the _Governments_. We criticise American social policy. Indeed I think it leaves a lot to be desired. But I certainly wouldn't shout about ours (Britain's). We did feel it necessary to have Band Aid, didn't we? We have many charities to look after the aged, the disabled, the homeless, and so on, funded by private subscription, because *our* social policy doesn't do the job. You can't always draw conclusions about the populace from Governmental policy. I could easily say that American politicians can _buy_ success in American politics. But then in this country we do it either by rigging the electoral boundaries (our obsolete system) or by having a war. Our government, after all, was elected by a *minority* of the voting population. Does this make our system better than the USA's? Summary: flame the politicians by all means, they are paid to take it, but keep an open mind about the people. -- Scott Larnach Janet: scott@uk.ac.ed.cstvax Edinburgh Unix Support Arpa: scott@cstvax.ed.ac.uk Tel: +44 31 667 1081 x2629 Uucp: scott@cstvax.uucp
vgfranceschi@watcgl.UUCP (Valerio Franceschin) (03/02/86)
> In article <558@mmm.UUCP> allen@mmm.UUCP (Kurt Allen) writes: > > > > All in all I really am getting very tired of the emotional attitude > > that people on this net and in the press are taking. The people > > in 51L were very aware of the dangers involved and took necessary > > precautions. Isnt it time for the rest of us to take the same attitude > > and quit being overly dramatic at a simple fact of life - people die ? > > > Oh? It is the nature of most of us to treat death rather "dramatically" > with services, memorials, etc. I respect your opinion to ignore this, > but my attitude is somewhat different. To paraphrase: "You see, > Mr. Allen, I would insist on a decent burial even if it were your > body lying back there." My my, how the crap continues to fly in this newsgroup. I'm sure that Kurt Allen didn't mean that the astronauts aren't worthy of a "decent burial", or that memorials wouldn't be appropriate. His point that some people are being overly dramatic is well taken! To treat the Challenger disaster as the most significant event of our times is absurd. It is equally absurd to elevate the human beings on board to some god-like status. Yes, their deaths were saddening, but so are all deaths.
jimc@ucla-cs.UUCP (03/04/86)
May I suggest transferring this to net.flame? My finger is getting tired
pressing ^N so much.
--
James F. Carter (213) 206-1306
UCLA-SEASnet; 2567 Boelter Hall; 405 Hilgard Ave.; Los Angeles, CA 90024
UUCP:...!{ihnp4,ucbvax,{hao!cepu}}!ucla-cs!jimc ARPA:jimc@locus.UCLA.EDUed@wgivax.UUCP (03/05/86)
I must "cancel my subscription" to this newsgroup, since I have now read two months of news re: columbia, space, aviation, and have found nothing but editorial comment on geopolitical and social aspects of the shuttle program, space technology, astrophysics, and commercial space exploration. The creation of a newsgroup for the communication of information of a non-editorial nature would be beneficial. Good day.