Only in America
-
Widow sues Bin Laden [BBC News] German lawyer seeks terror damages [BBC News] What crap will they think of next to get copensation. It's because of the rediculous American approach to seeking cmpensation for plain bloody stupid things, that in the UK our rates are going up. The UK is going compensation mad. Hell, you've even Germany roped in now. :mad: When will you people learn: you have to work to get money, not steal it on other's hard work. And finders are not keepers in the eyes of the law. Also, on another 'topic' altogether: New York rejects Saudi millions [BBC News] QUOTE: New York city officials have rejected a $10m donation from a prominent member of the Saudi royal family after he said America should "re-examine its policies" in the wake of the attacks on New York and Washington. I think America should re-examin it's policies. It's obvious to anybody with an ounce of commom sense that they must have serious pissed someone off. Does that mean I'll get my hundred quid back? I could sure do with it about now.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
-
Widow sues Bin Laden [BBC News] German lawyer seeks terror damages [BBC News] What crap will they think of next to get copensation. It's because of the rediculous American approach to seeking cmpensation for plain bloody stupid things, that in the UK our rates are going up. The UK is going compensation mad. Hell, you've even Germany roped in now. :mad: When will you people learn: you have to work to get money, not steal it on other's hard work. And finders are not keepers in the eyes of the law. Also, on another 'topic' altogether: New York rejects Saudi millions [BBC News] QUOTE: New York city officials have rejected a $10m donation from a prominent member of the Saudi royal family after he said America should "re-examine its policies" in the wake of the attacks on New York and Washington. I think America should re-examin it's policies. It's obvious to anybody with an ounce of commom sense that they must have serious pissed someone off. Does that mean I'll get my hundred quid back? I could sure do with it about now.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
> I think America should re-examin it's policies. It's obvious to anybody > with an ounce of commom sense that they must have serious pissed someone > off. Dave, no matter *what* the U.S. does, it's gonna piss off somebody, so why the hell should we "re-examine our policies"? > Does that mean I'll get my hundred quid back? Talk to the Germans. They appear to be receptive to law suits. To hell with those thin-skinned pillow-biters. - Me, 10/03/2001
-
Widow sues Bin Laden [BBC News] German lawyer seeks terror damages [BBC News] What crap will they think of next to get copensation. It's because of the rediculous American approach to seeking cmpensation for plain bloody stupid things, that in the UK our rates are going up. The UK is going compensation mad. Hell, you've even Germany roped in now. :mad: When will you people learn: you have to work to get money, not steal it on other's hard work. And finders are not keepers in the eyes of the law. Also, on another 'topic' altogether: New York rejects Saudi millions [BBC News] QUOTE: New York city officials have rejected a $10m donation from a prominent member of the Saudi royal family after he said America should "re-examine its policies" in the wake of the attacks on New York and Washington. I think America should re-examin it's policies. It's obvious to anybody with an ounce of commom sense that they must have serious pissed someone off. Does that mean I'll get my hundred quid back? I could sure do with it about now.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
Excuse me??? I can understand this in a normal situation, but this situation is anything but normal. I think that the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden's frozen assets should be handed over to the family members of those killed in the WTC and Pentagon attrocities. I can understand that you have to work to earn money, but these people have suffered a tremendous loss by losing a loved one. So they deserve to have something given to them. If you were talking aobut someone faking an injury in a car or something, then I would agree, but not in this case. Brigham W. Thorp Software Engineer Timex Corporation
-
> I think America should re-examin it's policies. It's obvious to anybody > with an ounce of commom sense that they must have serious pissed someone > off. Dave, no matter *what* the U.S. does, it's gonna piss off somebody, so why the hell should we "re-examine our policies"? > Does that mean I'll get my hundred quid back? Talk to the Germans. They appear to be receptive to law suits. To hell with those thin-skinned pillow-biters. - Me, 10/03/2001
It is possible to come to a comprmise on every issue that will suit everybody on earth. It wont be easy, but it can be done. Of course, that will ultimately mean making sacrifices yourself, and not many people I know of are willing to do that when it really comes down to it.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
-
It is possible to come to a comprmise on every issue that will suit everybody on earth. It wont be easy, but it can be done. Of course, that will ultimately mean making sacrifices yourself, and not many people I know of are willing to do that when it really comes down to it.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
-
Excuse me??? I can understand this in a normal situation, but this situation is anything but normal. I think that the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden's frozen assets should be handed over to the family members of those killed in the WTC and Pentagon attrocities. I can understand that you have to work to earn money, but these people have suffered a tremendous loss by losing a loved one. So they deserve to have something given to them. If you were talking aobut someone faking an injury in a car or something, then I would agree, but not in this case. Brigham W. Thorp Software Engineer Timex Corporation
But I got really, really, really hurt, and lost three weeks wages when I fell over the cable in my office. Why can't I have an exception too? The point is that you must be very, very careful when you make exceptions, no matter how obvious something may appear to you personally. I think that the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden's frozen assets should be handed over to the family members of those killed in the WTC and Pentagon attrocities. And why can't the millions of people fleeing Alfganistan, because of the actions of the Taliban and those connected to them, get a cut? They are just as much victims as the rest of them, and indeed, need the money much more than a widow with $200,000 from her husband's life insurance, and government support for four children. Incidentally, you [as in the readers of this site] may like to visit (and if you can afford to, subscribe) to Janes Information Group's international security buletin (http://www.janes.com/security). They are the only place to go for unbiased, acurate accounts of what happened and what is happening. Even the FBI and CIA turn to Janes for information.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
-
Nope, won't ever happen. Some people's views are diametrically opposed. Bin Laden is pissed because we are in Arab states. Pakistan was pissed because we left them alone. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
The wonderful word is compramisation. If it's spelled correctly anyway. ;) If you can reach a desicion that pleases 9/10, yet has showed some consideration for the 1/10 left out, then you will have 10 happy party's. If you make the desicion to support the 9/10 and ignore the 1, you will have 9 party's unwilling to sacrifice and 1 very, very pissed one. And we all know what 1 very, very pisse party is capable of :|
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
-
But I got really, really, really hurt, and lost three weeks wages when I fell over the cable in my office. Why can't I have an exception too? The point is that you must be very, very careful when you make exceptions, no matter how obvious something may appear to you personally. I think that the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden's frozen assets should be handed over to the family members of those killed in the WTC and Pentagon attrocities. And why can't the millions of people fleeing Alfganistan, because of the actions of the Taliban and those connected to them, get a cut? They are just as much victims as the rest of them, and indeed, need the money much more than a widow with $200,000 from her husband's life insurance, and government support for four children. Incidentally, you [as in the readers of this site] may like to visit (and if you can afford to, subscribe) to Janes Information Group's international security buletin (http://www.janes.com/security). They are the only place to go for unbiased, acurate accounts of what happened and what is happening. Even the FBI and CIA turn to Janes for information.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
And why can't the millions of people fleeing Alfganistan, because of the actions of the Taliban and those connected to them, get a cut? They are just as much victims as the rest of them, and indeed, need the money much more than a widow with $200,000 from her husband's life insurance, and government support for four children. We agree on something... Afganistan is in very very bad shape. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
-
The wonderful word is compramisation. If it's spelled correctly anyway. ;) If you can reach a desicion that pleases 9/10, yet has showed some consideration for the 1/10 left out, then you will have 10 happy party's. If you make the desicion to support the 9/10 and ignore the 1, you will have 9 party's unwilling to sacrifice and 1 very, very pissed one. And we all know what 1 very, very pisse party is capable of :|
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
But there is a huge difference between coming up with a solution everyone is happy with and reaching a consensus while all are still considered. There are people hell bent of killing all blacks or all Jews. You can never please people when their views exist so far outside the norms of society. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
-
It is possible to come to a comprmise on every issue that will suit everybody on earth. It wont be easy, but it can be done. Of course, that will ultimately mean making sacrifices yourself, and not many people I know of are willing to do that when it really comes down to it.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
The problem is that comprimising isn't often *completely* left up to the individual. A person may personally agree with a given idea, but they are often (always?) coerced by religious, racial, cultural, social, geographical, financial, or political systems in which they participate. And you want to know something? There is NO SUCH THING as an un-biased opinion. When you get right down to it, EVERYBODY has an agenda that is aligned with one or more of the forces I mentioned above. In short, it just ain't gonna happen, especially with this many people on the freakin planet. You can't even get everyone on the planet to agree with a simple statement such as "The sky is blue". To hell with those thin-skinned pillow-biters. - Me, 10/03/2001
-
But there is a huge difference between coming up with a solution everyone is happy with and reaching a consensus while all are still considered. There are people hell bent of killing all blacks or all Jews. You can never please people when their views exist so far outside the norms of society. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
reaching a consensus while all are still considered. ... You can never please people when their views exist so far outside the norms of society. So baling out from even bothing and making them hate you even more is the answer? Nothing is ever black and white, nothing will ever please everybody, but by considering the party's viewpoint from an unbiased position, and trying to understand why and how they drew their conclusions, would enable you to come to some kind of compramise that gave a little to each party, not matter how little that little may be. (if you can follow all those littles!) If you can't truly understand their views (and let's be blunt here, I doubt any of us really do), then how can you sit here and dictate to them what is right and what is wrong? Remember this? : Give a man a loaf of bread and he will feed his family for a week. Give a man a packet of wheat and he will grow wheat to turn into bread to feed his family for a year. Well the same concept applies to the current situation, but with reagards to views. We can't make truly fair and just desicions, so we shouldn't really look too deeply into these arguments. There are people who understand more, and these are the people making the desicions, but the final solution (if you will excuse the poor taste in using that phrase here) cannot be dicated to the terrorists. As hard as it may be to accept they are humans, and thus will not abandon their views - no matter how wrong they may appear to us - they are humans. Would you like somebody (or more importantly, would you accept somebody) telling you you could not be a Christian anymore, but instead must be a practising homosexual netball player? (Think of that in terms of concept and you should get the point I am pushing here). Both sides of the current situation are like deer with their horns locked. Neither side is willing to allow a concesion for the other, and thus nobody is going to move to the good-for-all solution. They will kjust keep fighting till one side breaks down. Five hundred years a go I would expect this, but today I would not.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff
-
And why can't the millions of people fleeing Alfganistan, because of the actions of the Taliban and those connected to them, get a cut? They are just as much victims as the rest of them, and indeed, need the money much more than a widow with $200,000 from her husband's life insurance, and government support for four children. We agree on something... Afganistan is in very very bad shape. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
-
Widow sues Bin Laden [BBC News] German lawyer seeks terror damages [BBC News] What crap will they think of next to get copensation. It's because of the rediculous American approach to seeking cmpensation for plain bloody stupid things, that in the UK our rates are going up. The UK is going compensation mad. Hell, you've even Germany roped in now. :mad: When will you people learn: you have to work to get money, not steal it on other's hard work. And finders are not keepers in the eyes of the law. Also, on another 'topic' altogether: New York rejects Saudi millions [BBC News] QUOTE: New York city officials have rejected a $10m donation from a prominent member of the Saudi royal family after he said America should "re-examine its policies" in the wake of the attacks on New York and Washington. I think America should re-examin it's policies. It's obvious to anybody with an ounce of commom sense that they must have serious pissed someone off. Does that mean I'll get my hundred quid back? I could sure do with it about now.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
I think America should re-examin it's policies. It's obvious to anybody with an ounce of commom sense that they must have serious pissed someone off. Yes, we should have learned from Britain's Mid-East mistakes in the late 1800's - early 1900's. IMO, essentially the basis for most of what's happening in the Mid-East today. -Sean ---- "Vigilance With Pride"
-
reaching a consensus while all are still considered. ... You can never please people when their views exist so far outside the norms of society. So baling out from even bothing and making them hate you even more is the answer? Nothing is ever black and white, nothing will ever please everybody, but by considering the party's viewpoint from an unbiased position, and trying to understand why and how they drew their conclusions, would enable you to come to some kind of compramise that gave a little to each party, not matter how little that little may be. (if you can follow all those littles!) If you can't truly understand their views (and let's be blunt here, I doubt any of us really do), then how can you sit here and dictate to them what is right and what is wrong? Remember this? : Give a man a loaf of bread and he will feed his family for a week. Give a man a packet of wheat and he will grow wheat to turn into bread to feed his family for a year. Well the same concept applies to the current situation, but with reagards to views. We can't make truly fair and just desicions, so we shouldn't really look too deeply into these arguments. There are people who understand more, and these are the people making the desicions, but the final solution (if you will excuse the poor taste in using that phrase here) cannot be dicated to the terrorists. As hard as it may be to accept they are humans, and thus will not abandon their views - no matter how wrong they may appear to us - they are humans. Would you like somebody (or more importantly, would you accept somebody) telling you you could not be a Christian anymore, but instead must be a practising homosexual netball player? (Think of that in terms of concept and you should get the point I am pushing here). Both sides of the current situation are like deer with their horns locked. Neither side is willing to allow a concesion for the other, and thus nobody is going to move to the good-for-all solution. They will kjust keep fighting till one side breaks down. Five hundred years a go I would expect this, but today I would not.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff
-
I don't beleive you answered the questions I asked in my reply. Maybe you could take the time to? I have follow up arguments just itching to be posted.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
-
I think America should re-examin it's policies. It's obvious to anybody with an ounce of commom sense that they must have serious pissed someone off. Yes, we should have learned from Britain's Mid-East mistakes in the late 1800's - early 1900's. IMO, essentially the basis for most of what's happening in the Mid-East today. -Sean ---- "Vigilance With Pride"
I agree conclusively. But we should have moved on from then.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
-
But I got really, really, really hurt, and lost three weeks wages when I fell over the cable in my office. Why can't I have an exception too? The point is that you must be very, very careful when you make exceptions, no matter how obvious something may appear to you personally. I think that the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden's frozen assets should be handed over to the family members of those killed in the WTC and Pentagon attrocities. And why can't the millions of people fleeing Alfganistan, because of the actions of the Taliban and those connected to them, get a cut? They are just as much victims as the rest of them, and indeed, need the money much more than a widow with $200,000 from her husband's life insurance, and government support for four children. Incidentally, you [as in the readers of this site] may like to visit (and if you can afford to, subscribe) to Janes Information Group's international security buletin (http://www.janes.com/security). They are the only place to go for unbiased, acurate accounts of what happened and what is happening. Even the FBI and CIA turn to Janes for information.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
But I got really, really, really hurt, and lost three weeks wages when I fell over the cable in my office. Why can't I have an exception too? The point is that you must be very, very careful when you make exceptions, no matter how obvious something may appear to you personally. You're right, David. I think the difference between the terrorists and your office cable is quite large, though. Personally, I can't stand the law suits over coffee being to hot when you accidentally spilled it on yourself or things like that. The point where the offender _should_ be required to make restitution is when it was an intentional act. In other words, a cable on a floor is unlikely to have been placed there just to keep you from work for 3 weeks. But the terrorists certainly tried hard to hurt a bunch of people. (Although individual law suits against them is unlikely to be a good answer.) John
-
reaching a consensus while all are still considered. ... You can never please people when their views exist so far outside the norms of society. So baling out from even bothing and making them hate you even more is the answer? Nothing is ever black and white, nothing will ever please everybody, but by considering the party's viewpoint from an unbiased position, and trying to understand why and how they drew their conclusions, would enable you to come to some kind of compramise that gave a little to each party, not matter how little that little may be. (if you can follow all those littles!) If you can't truly understand their views (and let's be blunt here, I doubt any of us really do), then how can you sit here and dictate to them what is right and what is wrong? Remember this? : Give a man a loaf of bread and he will feed his family for a week. Give a man a packet of wheat and he will grow wheat to turn into bread to feed his family for a year. Well the same concept applies to the current situation, but with reagards to views. We can't make truly fair and just desicions, so we shouldn't really look too deeply into these arguments. There are people who understand more, and these are the people making the desicions, but the final solution (if you will excuse the poor taste in using that phrase here) cannot be dicated to the terrorists. As hard as it may be to accept they are humans, and thus will not abandon their views - no matter how wrong they may appear to us - they are humans. Would you like somebody (or more importantly, would you accept somebody) telling you you could not be a Christian anymore, but instead must be a practising homosexual netball player? (Think of that in terms of concept and you should get the point I am pushing here). Both sides of the current situation are like deer with their horns locked. Neither side is willing to allow a concesion for the other, and thus nobody is going to move to the good-for-all solution. They will kjust keep fighting till one side breaks down. Five hundred years a go I would expect this, but today I would not.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff
There are no easy answers. Taliban has a stand based on a version of Islamic law, that they want to establish as the basis for leading life around the world. This is supported by radical Islamic groups around the world. The democratic countries around the world believe in civil liberties and human rights. If the democratic countries stick to *principles* and are *not willing* to compromise, then they won't be trying to negotiate anything with Afghanistan before Sept 11. They would not be dealing with Saudi Arabia or Iraq. There are compromises already from the principles. These compromises are done so that both parties involved benefit. The Saudi administration has benefitted, Taliban benifitted from the western policies. But, they are not willing to compromise on anything that is in the way of their principles. The terrorist organizations never had a people's mandate to represent the issues that they represent. US can deal and negotiate foreign policy only with governments. The governments may have a problem with western diplomacy, but they voice it through diplomatic channels. There would be bloodshed in MiddleEast whether or not US is present in the region. Israel would be wiped out, if the western world does not support them. After all, UN created Israel. -Thomas
-
Widow sues Bin Laden [BBC News] German lawyer seeks terror damages [BBC News] What crap will they think of next to get copensation. It's because of the rediculous American approach to seeking cmpensation for plain bloody stupid things, that in the UK our rates are going up. The UK is going compensation mad. Hell, you've even Germany roped in now. :mad: When will you people learn: you have to work to get money, not steal it on other's hard work. And finders are not keepers in the eyes of the law. Also, on another 'topic' altogether: New York rejects Saudi millions [BBC News] QUOTE: New York city officials have rejected a $10m donation from a prominent member of the Saudi royal family after he said America should "re-examine its policies" in the wake of the attacks on New York and Washington. I think America should re-examin it's policies. It's obvious to anybody with an ounce of commom sense that they must have serious pissed someone off. Does that mean I'll get my hundred quid back? I could sure do with it about now.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
I think America should re-examin it's policies. it's fine to have a discussion about policies, but any change or even suggestion to change that IN ANY WAY looks like a compromise or softening of policy towards the demands of extremist groups only will make them stronger, will only prove their methods to work. the mayor should have cashed the check and shoved it up his ass -John
-
But I got really, really, really hurt, and lost three weeks wages when I fell over the cable in my office. Why can't I have an exception too? The point is that you must be very, very careful when you make exceptions, no matter how obvious something may appear to you personally. You're right, David. I think the difference between the terrorists and your office cable is quite large, though. Personally, I can't stand the law suits over coffee being to hot when you accidentally spilled it on yourself or things like that. The point where the offender _should_ be required to make restitution is when it was an intentional act. In other words, a cable on a floor is unlikely to have been placed there just to keep you from work for 3 weeks. But the terrorists certainly tried hard to hurt a bunch of people. (Although individual law suits against them is unlikely to be a good answer.) John
I obviously didn;t make it clear whay I was against compensation - in all cases. It's not that the idea of a person getting an amount of money to 'pay' for some accident that could (or couldn't) have been avoided isn't a good one, it's that the person rearly gets anything worthwhile out of it. In the UK, there is a company called "Claims Direct" that helps you make claims against anybody. It's a no-win no-fee service, but if you win you get on average less than 10% of the awarded damages. THAT IS WHAT I AM PROTESTING ABOUT. I do not want to see a bunch of rich lawyers get even richer at the expense of other peoples suffering.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com