JB wrote:

WOW!

I like idiots, but for the same reason ... seems to me, someone is
mistaken ...

No, KGB don't HAVE to manipulate idiots. They manipulate the intellectuals,
who in turn lead the idiots until they all wind up in a ditch. They only
serve purpose to destabilize and demoralize. There is no place for them in
normalization phase because they find they have been duped and become bitter
enemies. It is better they be liquidated first in the normalization phase.


Yeah, I guess ... whatever he said ...

Regards,
JS

On Nov 25, 11:26*am, Jim Lux wrote:
Art Unwin wrote:
Many of us have checked the net for the latest advances in antennas.
Advances are usually arrived at public university research units some
of which are partially funded by outside sources *Most, if not all,
the results are presented to the IEEE as a way of getting recognision.
But this information such as advancement in science is not provided to
the public even tho they came from a public institution. Thus you
cannot access it on the net as a member of the public as access is
with held UNLESS
you hand over some money to the IEEE. Why are the universites not
sharing their work with the public?
Is it because academics feel they are part of a special club divorced
from the public? Ofcourse I may be wrong
in taking that view in light of the fact that these study results are
available in libraries but why are they not put on the web for the
good of science and the general public at large?
Art

This is a complex issue and one of considerable debate within those
universities AND the publishers of the journals.

1) The journals have operating costs (someone has to edit them and do
the typesetting and production).. these must be paid by subscription
fees and page charges from the author. *Giving it away for free means
that other means must be developed for funding.

2) Not all the funding for research comes with a "must release to
public" clause. *For instance, you might get a grant to defray part of
the cost of some research, and fund the remaining part out of your own
assets. *The granting agency gets the data they want (at a lower cost
than paying for all of it), but you retain the rights.

3) Putting stuff on the web isn't free.

However, a LOT of newer research IS being published for free on the web.
PLOS (Public Library of Science), PubMed, arxiv, etc. are all examples.

Remember, too, that this is academia, and they tend to be conservative
and change slowly. *To a certain extent, it IS an exclusive club,
because publication leads to promotion, and the publication process is
full of gates and wickets. *The term "publish or perish" did not arise
out of thin air.

Jim
IEEE state that if papers were open source it would threaten the
presence of the IEEE?
This statement was in regard to the high costs of obtaining copies
from the IEEE without
having to pay the high costs of belonging . I understand the need for
peer review by academics but not necessarily a private entity
and the IEEE rights to publish such so, are the IEEE demanding SOLE
ownership of presented papers?
I am assuming that all papers presented by the Universities as well as
thesis papers belong to the parent university
based on a recent antenna patent awarded to a University derived from
a student dissertation. This leaves
an outstanding question !. If the university a public entity,
reserves the rights of all papers arrived at the university
then what rights do they hold that allows transference from the public
domain of those rights to a private institution to the detriment of
the public
that finance them?
Regards
Art Unwin

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

WOW!

I like idiots, but for the same reason ... seems to me, someone is
mistaken ...

No, KGB don't HAVE to manipulate idiots. They manipulate the
intellectuals,
who in turn lead the idiots until they all wind up in a ditch. They
only
serve purpose to destabilize and demoralize. There is no place for them
in
normalization phase because they find they have been duped and become
bitter
enemies. It is better they be liquidated first in the normalization
phase.


Yeah, I guess ... whatever he said ...

Regards,
JS

Here is full explanation from 1985 interview of KGB defector. If accent is
difficult, subtitles are in French.

Although plans may have changed since then, it appears that once plan is put
into motion, it is self-perpetuating since brainwashed idiots become too
deeply ingrained in thinking and entrenched in their positions, continually
indoctrinating others..

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov

JB wrote:

...
Here is full explanation from 1985 interview of KGB defector. If accent is
difficult, subtitles are in French.

Although plans may have changed since then, it appears that once plan is put
into motion, it is self-perpetuating since brainwashed idiots become too
deeply ingrained in thinking and entrenched in their positions, continually
indoctrinating others..

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov

Your first problem, which seems to negate your entire statement(s), is
the obvious error in your definition of "intellectual." Anyone make
those error in reasoning/thinking is far from an "intellectual",
although very young ones might make those errors.

An exact example of what the error(s) you are making was given with John
Mccain--the IDIOT "intellectuals" called him a war hero!

Now, someone who was ONLY able to become a pilot because his father was
an admiral and exerted his influence, smashed up five planes
(http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjoh...ost_five_u.htm)
and was captured by the enemy and held for five years is NOT a true "war
hero" in the true meaning to the term ...

.... idiots abound, you can know them by the errors in the reasoning,
text and thinking ... idiots can't ... :-(

Regards,
JS

JB wrote:

...
Here is full explanation from 1985 interview of KGB defector. If accent is
difficult, subtitles are in French.

Although plans may have changed since then, it appears that once plan is put
into motion, it is self-perpetuating since brainwashed idiots become too
deeply ingrained in thinking and entrenched in their positions, continually
indoctrinating others..

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov

Your first problem, which seems to negate your entire statement(s), is
the obvious error in your definition of "intellectual." Anyone making
those errors in reasoning/thinking is far from an "intellectual",
although very young ones might make those errors.

An exact example of what the error(s) you are making was given with John
Mccain--the IDIOT "intellectuals" called him a war hero!

Now, someone who was ONLY able to become a pilot because his father was
an admiral and exerted his influence, smashed up five planes
(http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjoh...ost_five_u.htm)

and was captured by the enemy and held for five years is NOT a true "war
hero" in the true meaning to the term ...

.... idiots abound, you can know them by the errors in the reasoning,
text and speech ... idiots can't ... :-(

Regards,
JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

...
Here is full explanation from 1985 interview of KGB defector. If accent
is
difficult, subtitles are in French.

Although plans may have changed since then, it appears that once plan is
put
into motion, it is self-perpetuating since brainwashed idiots become too
deeply ingrained in thinking and entrenched in their positions,
continually
indoctrinating others..

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov

Your first problem, which seems to negate your entire statement(s), is
the obvious error in your definition of "intellectual." Anyone making
those errors in reasoning/thinking is far from an "intellectual",
although very young ones might make those errors.

An exact example of what the error(s) you are making was given with John
Mccain--the IDIOT "intellectuals" called him a war hero!

Now, someone who was ONLY able to become a pilot because his father was
an admiral and exerted his influence, smashed up five planes

(http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjoh...ost_five_u.htm)

and was captured by the enemy and held for five years is NOT a true "war
hero" in the true meaning to the term ...

... idiots abound, you can know them by the errors in the reasoning,
text and speech ... idiots can't ... :-(

Regards,
JS

You must be an intellectual. Help me to reason this then.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Headlines/...aspx?id=336456

Now, someone who was ONLY able to become a pilot because his father was
an admiral and exerted his influence, smashed up five planes

(http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjoh...ost_five_u.htm)
and was captured by the enemy and held for five years is NOT a true "war
hero" in the true meaning to the term ...

... idiots abound, you can know them by the errors in the reasoning,
text and thinking ... idiots can't ... :-(

The Forrestal disaster was attributed to druggies. The enemy was no doubt
there on board. Many people have yet to figure out about the mechanics of
such disasters. I submit that there will be 2 sides to every story to come
out of the Vietnam war, and that sufficient truth is often left out to allow
that.

I wrecked a few cars before I learned how to drive. Have you ever been
tortured for information? or just for the hell of it? People who sit around
and talk about it over tea aren't fit to judge who a hero is but they are
often left to talk about it. Let's just call him "experienced". I really
don't consider Obama to be the "Black Messiah" either.

I feel that both candidates were potential disasters, showing the idiots had
prevailed before the election. The vote only served as an international
"poll" on how best to proceed to our doom. It seems the election has tried
to set the clock back to what it was before 9/11. Let's see what develops
this time around.

JB wrote:

...
You must be an intellectual. Help me to reason this then.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Headlines/...aspx?id=336456


I am intellectual enough to recognize something I have never taken an
interest in. I am intellectual enough to recognize something I have
never read on, engaged in discussion upon, and things which invoke and
evoke emotions to cloud the participants into a "religious fervor",
willing to guard and defend their own political beliefs.

And, finally, I am intellectual to recognize something which I have no
intellectual interest in ...

Now, all that said, it would surprise me if one had ALL the facts, data
and knowledge of the evil done, that the KGB should appear any more evil
than the CIA or other related and/or secret arms of their and/or our
governments ... my blind belief that men in power would honor their
duties and responsibilities to the American people has been destroyed.

The time when our nation stood on infallible principals, morals, ethics,
honors and commitments has slowly disappeared until such territories are
loath to intellectuals--other than to demand a return to sanity, truth
in government and the publics right to know, and a fair and just system.

Idiots will see little problem jumping into this quagmire.

P.S. Any of the following, and all, definitions of quagmire will do:

1. an area of miry or boggy ground whose surface yields under the tread;
a bog.
2. a situation from which extrication is very difficult: a quagmire of
financial indebtedness.
3. anything soft or flabby.

Or, intellectuals can tell when an argument or discussion is worth
having; for the rest, there is always Rush Limbaugh.

Regards,
JS

... my blind belief that men in power would honor their
duties and responsibilities to the American people has been destroyed.

The time when our nation stood on infallible principals, morals, ethics,
honors and commitments has slowly disappeared until such territories are
loath to intellectuals--other than to demand a return to sanity, truth
in government and the publics right to know, and a fair and just system.


This is actually where I have stood since the first grade. Except that the
public seems to have abdicated it's right to know by entrusting that to
advertisers and spokesman.

1. Vote no when there is too much verbiage in legislation
2. Vote such that politicians will tend wear themselves out (on each other)
before doing harm which often results from an unchallenged decision. This
also gives the public more of a swing vote in their decisions.

The only infallible is God. Our country takes a tumble every time we lose
our moral compass. Aside from that, NO country or system has ever been
infallible. We could be disappointed under any system that we entrust all
power to men (or women). Be very afraid when they are all in complete
agreement, because they won't need us for anything anymore.

JB wrote:

...
The Forrestal disaster was attributed to druggies. The enemy was no doubt
there on board. Many people have yet to figure out about the mechanics of
such disasters. I submit that there will be 2 sides to every story to come
out of the Vietnam war, and that sufficient truth is often left out to allow
that.

I wrecked a few cars before I learned how to drive. Have you ever been
tortured for information? or just for the hell of it? People who sit around
and talk about it over tea aren't fit to judge who a hero is but they are
often left to talk about it. Let's just call him "experienced". I really
don't consider Obama to be the "Black Messiah" either.

I feel that both candidates were potential disasters, showing the idiots had
prevailed before the election. The vote only served as an international
"poll" on how best to proceed to our doom. It seems the election has tried
to set the clock back to what it was before 9/11. Let's see what develops
this time around.

Along the way, though college, it is pointed out to you that any great
story (or, at least a believable one) has a protagonist and an
antagonist (sometimes more of them, sometimes less of them); i.e. a
"good guy" and a "bad guy." It is based on a storyline where great
adversity is found, great sacrifice and energy extended and exerted, and
finally the defeat of the enemy is had ... funny, but we will fall for
this same line though uncounted books by uncounted authors. Read any
great Greek tragedies/novels/plays, Shakespeare knew this and you find
it in his offerings. (Or, turn on Rush, "... bad democrats, good
republicans ...", this is simply recited over-and-over again to keep
idiots in line and massage the weak minds into the hypnotic/religious
lies which got us here ... some still have futures which hinge on
keeping the insanity alive. Indeed, real change will bring collapse ...)

Such is also how our political system is arranged, good guy vs. bad guy
(and, you just pick who is good and who is bad, or toss a coin. Or have
you allegiances bought and paid for ...) And, so is our foreign policy
applied, we are the good guy, they are the bad guy and these are our
friends who help us in our great adventure ... fear gets the whole ball
rolling, even unjustified fear(s) will work ...

Someday, all will see the truth, become ashamed of living such a shallow
"truth(s)", and be shamed into higher standards and goals ... until that
time, a few can control the minds of many ... and ultimately the world.

Regards,
JS