OT [Ham-80211] Re: ham-80211 Digest, Vol 3, Issue 2

[J.P. Rouland]

Jeff and Guillaume:
I have pages and pages to say about the subject (90% along your lines), 
but, in respect of the first intent of this list, will restraint 
myself..LOL!
I'll just say this: being of french origin, with beard and mustache, and 
( still) a heavy accent, I've often been asked if I was "from the 
Middle-East", and "treated" as such. These days, when I protest and SAY 
I'm french, things get even worse.......
I thought we ( the French) taught the Americans the notions of 
Freedom.... a long time ago..... Looks like the lesson has been 
distorted, since..... To-day's situation is as "transient" as the man 
behind it: I will personnally pitch in for a 1-way ticket to 
Crawford.....( while aware it won't -by much- solve all problems, alas..)
'nuff! Back to 802 and free access.....
J.P. Rouland NQ6T

Jeff King wrote:

> Good well thought out post Gulluame, just a few comments.
> 
> 
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 15:17:18 -0400, Guillaume Filion wrote:
> 
>>From: "Jeff King" <jeff at aerodata.net> wrote:
>>
>>>That much being said, I'm well aware of the current sad state of
>>>affairs
> 
> ....
> 
> 
>>I'm not sure what it has to do with 802.11 and HAMs but I'll bite.
> 
> 
> Not much, other then the embedded attitudes toward 802.11b war driving. 
> Frankly, as a hobby here in the U.S., many in our defacto leadership "The 
> ARRL" really sets a very bad tone for amateur radio by cozing up to the 
> government and asking for entitlements from "homeland security' and other 
> paramilitary government organizations. I'd much rather see a (amateur radio) 
> organization more independent,  more outspoken, and more concerned about our 
> rights as opposed to getting government entitlements. It breeds an atmosphere 
> of acceptance and defeat.
> 
> (which, to keep this on topic, and to its credit, TAPR has occasionally 
> spoken out against and supported freedom and advancement in amateur radio... 
> and don't get me wrong, I largely support the ARRL, but the bulk of its 
> membership are not interested in the technical aspects of radio... or so it 
> seems to me)
> 
> As to the rest, I've got a few comments, but totally not amateur radio at 
> this point.
> 
> 
>>I think that the present situation in the US is a "transient state"
>>caused by the terrorists attacks of 2001. You can see examples of
>>this in every war; for example, during WW2, asians living in the US
>>and Canada were put into camps in fear that they would work for the
>>ennemy.
> 
> 
> Yeap, those funny looking Asian-Americans where put in the camps, where as 
> the white looking German/Italians where left to run around.  A comment later 
> on your "war' statement.
> 
> 
>>These days, we can see a roughly similar situation with the
>>arabs living in the US; they are not put into camps but are searched
>>and inspected more than they would if they were'nt arabs. 
> 
> 
> I'm a old WASP (White Anglo Saxen). I've had quite a few run-in's with the 
> TSA idiots working security at the airports already. You offended them, or 
> question their right to search you,  out come the rubber gloves and the guy 
> with the gun starts to stare you down. I guess alot of old white guys have 
> been stealing planes in Detroit.
> 
> 
> 
>>Things should be getting back to normal ("permanent state") in a
>>couple years if there are no more attacks.
> 
> 
> And you made the analogy earlier:
> 
> 
>>"You can see examples of this in every war"
> 
> 
> Ahhh... the "War on Terrorism"  Problem with that is, as a student of 
> history, terrorism in some way shape or form has been with us for 1000's of 
> years. 
> 
> So in effect, if "Terrorism is war" then what we end up with is a Permanent 
> War, aka George Orwell's novell 1984. See:
> http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/6243
> for some more discussion on this.
> 
> 
>>It's the security
>>paradox, if the CIA/FBI/etc are effective in stopping attacks, thing
>>will go back to normal and the govn't will cut the CIA/FBI/etc
>>funding and reduce their powers.
> 
> 
> I don't have the figures at my finger tips, but the government grew immensely 
> (as it should have) during World War 2. Yet at the conclusion of the war, it 
> never came near its pre-war size, and only continued to grow bigger.
> 
> Historically, this reduction in size, once government gets its fingers in, is 
> unlikely to happen.
> 
> 
>>Note that I'm not stating an opinion of this behavior, I'm just
>>associating facts; I'm personally not sure what to think about this.
> 
> 
> Stay in Canada?  ;-) 
> 
> Well, just kidding, I  consider myself a patriot and why this topic hit my 
> hot button. To the U.S. hams, their is an alternative to Twiddle Dee and 
> Twiddle Dumb, take this political test:
> http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html
> then if your curious, look here:
> http://www.lp.org/
> 
> 
> 
> 
>>73 and have a good week-end, GFK's
> 
> 
> You too.... 
> 
> -Jeff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ham-80211 mailing list
> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
>