twitter: rec.crafts.metalworking - 25 new messages in 9 topics

rec.crafts.metalworking
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking?hl=en

rec.crafts.metalworking@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Western snow plow with all hydraulics and controller
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/f415f0567c066041?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:07 pm
From: Ignoramus30639

On 2010-03-26, Karl Townsend <karltownsend.NOT@embarqmail.com> wrote:
>
> "Ignoramus30639" <ignoramus30639@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote in message
> news:VeSdnfb5sMdxYTbWnZ2dnUVZ_sGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On 2010-03-25, Pete C. <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ignoramus30639 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Would you say it is worth $220? if it works?
>>>
>>> It's 1/10 of the new cost for the cheapest ones.
>>
>> OK, I just brought it home. I will try to adapt it to my Chevy for the
>> next winter. I may have to tinker with the control a little bit. I
>> have very little clue how snowplows work. I may need to do some
>> welding to adapt it to my truck.
>>
>> i
>
> What's the number for the Cook county sheriff? I need to report a robbery.

DuPage county

> I've used a snow plow like this quite bit in the past. They are REAL HARD
> on your pickup. So much so, that I sold the plow and bought a snow blower.
> I went through two auto trannies and had to have the frame mounting
> re-welded. But I did make a fair amount of cash doing parking lots.

What kind of pickup did you have?

Could it be that you simply were too hard on your truck? Like, you
tried to push continuously?

== 2 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 12:14 pm
From: jeff

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 17:45:17 -0500, Ignoramus30639
<ignoramus30639@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote:

>Would you say it is worth $220? if it works?

How do you sllep at night ?????????????? :-)

Plows are generally ok on trucks..... most any way..... some will
void warranty. If all your gonna do is your driveway then have at
it. Push snow back as far as you can your first storm because once it
freezes the the problems start.... nouthing like plowing fresh snow
and hitting a frozen snowbank,

Don't run the road with the plow mounted. The front ends of trucks
really dont like it.. Put it on before it snows, plow the snow then
take it off.

Oh Ya sleep tight, You did good

== 3 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:13 pm
From: "Pete C."

Ignoramus30639 wrote:
>
> On 2010-03-26, Karl Townsend <karltownsend.NOT@embarqmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > "Ignoramus30639" <ignoramus30639@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:VeSdnfb5sMdxYTbWnZ2dnUVZ_sGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> >> On 2010-03-25, Pete C. <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Ignoramus30639 wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Would you say it is worth $220? if it works?
> >>>
> >>> It's 1/10 of the new cost for the cheapest ones.
> >>
> >> OK, I just brought it home. I will try to adapt it to my Chevy for the
> >> next winter. I may have to tinker with the control a little bit. I
> >> have very little clue how snowplows work. I may need to do some
> >> welding to adapt it to my truck.
> >>
> >> i
> >
> > What's the number for the Cook county sheriff? I need to report a robbery.
>
> DuPage county
>
> > I've used a snow plow like this quite bit in the past. They are REAL HARD
> > on your pickup. So much so, that I sold the plow and bought a snow blower.
> > I went through two auto trannies and had to have the frame mounting
> > re-welded. But I did make a fair amount of cash doing parking lots.
>
> What kind of pickup did you have?
>
> Could it be that you simply were too hard on your truck? Like, you
> tried to push continuously?
>
> i

Pushing continuously is the easy part, the hard part is all the slamming
back and forth between forward and reverse gears and never getting
enough speed to lock the torque converter. Heat is the enemy of an
automatic transmission and that type of activity heats them up big time.
There also isn't enough airflow at those low speeds for the normal
transmission coolers to work properly.

== 4 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:17 pm
From: stans4@prolynx.com

On Mar 25, 6:16 pm, Ignoramus30639 <ignoramus30...@NOSPAM.
30639.invalid> wrote:
> On 2010-03-25, Pete C. <aux3.DO...@snet.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Ignoramus30639 wrote:
>
> >> Would you say it is worth $220? if it works?
>
> > It's 1/10 of the new cost for the cheapest ones.
>
> OK, I just brought it home. I will try to adapt it to my Chevy for the
> next winter. I may have to tinker with the control a little bit. I
> have very little clue how snowplows work. I may need to do some
> welding to adapt it to my truck.
>
> i

If you're smart, you'll buy the lower attachment frame for your
specific vehicle. My dad wasted weeks trying to adapt one from a
Toyota Landcruiser to his IH. Ended up getting the frame from the
dealer anyway. Took an afternoon to bolt on to existing attachment
points. The upper frame with the cylinder+pump bolted on to frame
ends. Have to have a good solid attachment. The pump was run by a
starter motor, was pretty much self-contained. He set up a set of
relays for the controller box, had swing cylinders on the plow, the
controller had cables to operate valves up front along with switches
to control the pump. The box lasted longer than the Scout did using
the relays. One problem he had was finding a straight path from the
box inside the cab to the hydraulic unit up front and center, lots of
engine stuff in the way. Could be a fairly large problem with today's
crowded engine compartments.

Stan

== 5 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:32 pm
From: Ignoramus30639

On 2010-03-25, jeff <jeff@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 17:45:17 -0500, Ignoramus30639
><ignoramus30639@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Would you say it is worth $220? if it works?
>
>
> How do you sllep at night ?????????????? :-)
>
>
> Plows are generally ok on trucks..... most any way..... some will
> void warranty. If all your gonna do is your driveway then have at
> it. Push snow back as far as you can your first storm because once it
> freezes the the problems start.... nouthing like plowing fresh snow
> and hitting a frozen snowbank,
>
> Don't run the road with the plow mounted. The front ends of trucks
> really dont like it.. Put it on before it snows, plow the snow then
> take it off.
>
> Oh Ya sleep tight, You did good

Thanks. I feel a bit better. How hard is it to put the snowplow on,
how long does it take?

== 6 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:46 pm
From: "Pete C."

Ignoramus30639 wrote:
>
> On 2010-03-25, jeff <jeff@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 17:45:17 -0500, Ignoramus30639
> ><ignoramus30639@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>Would you say it is worth $220? if it works?
> >
> >
> > How do you sllep at night ?????????????? :-)
> >
> >
> > Plows are generally ok on trucks..... most any way..... some will
> > void warranty. If all your gonna do is your driveway then have at
> > it. Push snow back as far as you can your first storm because once it
> > freezes the the problems start.... nouthing like plowing fresh snow
> > and hitting a frozen snowbank,
> >
> > Don't run the road with the plow mounted. The front ends of trucks
> > really dont like it.. Put it on before it snows, plow the snow then
> > take it off.
> >
> > Oh Ya sleep tight, You did good
>
> Thanks. I feel a bit better. How hard is it to put the snowplow on,
> how long does it take?
>
> i

That depends on how well you rework the mounts. Generally, after you
have done it a few times, perhaps 15 minutes.

== 7 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:46 pm
From: Ignoramus30639

On 2010-03-26, stans4@prolynx.com <stans4@prolynx.com> wrote:

Pictures:

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Western-Snow-Plow/

> If you're smart, you'll buy the lower attachment frame for your
> specific vehicle. My dad wasted weeks trying to adapt one from a
> Toyota Landcruiser to his IH. Ended up getting the frame from the
> dealer anyway. Took an afternoon to bolt on to existing attachment
> points. The upper frame with the cylinder+pump bolted on to frame
> ends. Have to have a good solid attachment. The pump was run by a
> starter motor, was pretty much self-contained. He set up a set of
> relays for the controller box, had swing cylinders on the plow, the
> controller had cables to operate valves up front along with switches
> to control the pump. The box lasted longer than the Scout did using
> the relays. One problem he had was finding a straight path from the
> box inside the cab to the hydraulic unit up front and center, lots
> of engine stuff in the way. Could be a fairly large problem with
> today's crowded engine compartments.

Makes sense. Are all attachments going to match the plow?

== 8 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:47 pm
From: Ignoramus30639

pictures

http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Western-Snow-Plow/

== 9 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:50 pm
From: Ignoramus30639

On 2010-03-26, Ignoramus30639 <ignoramus30639@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote:
> pictures
>
> http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Western-Snow-Plow/

Oh, and the truck is Chevy Silverado 2500HD, with a gas engine.

How would it survive snow plowing?

== 10 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 7:06 pm
From: "Pete C."

Ignoramus30639 wrote:
>
> On 2010-03-26, Ignoramus30639 <ignoramus30639@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote:
> > pictures
> >
> > http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Western-Snow-Plow/
>
> Oh, and the truck is Chevy Silverado 2500HD, with a gas engine.
>
> How would it survive snow plowing?
>
> i

Looks good, I see it has power angle as well as lift, just what you
want.

If the truck doesn't have the snow plow prep option, you need to add an
extra transmission cooler and may need a front suspension upgrade to
handle the extra weight of the plow without sagging too much. If you're
just doing your driveway the later may not be an issue.

== 11 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 7:07 pm
From: "pdrahn@coinet.com"

On Mar 25, 6:50 pm, Ignoramus30639 <ignoramus30...@NOSPAM.
30639.invalid> wrote:
> On 2010-03-26, Ignoramus30639 <ignoramus30...@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote:
>
> > pictures
>
> >http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Western-Snow-Plow/
>
> Oh, and the truck is Chevy Silverado 2500HD, with a gas engine.
>
> How would it survive snow plowing?
>
> i

Is that a 4X4?
Paul

== 12 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 7:11 pm
From: Ignoramus30639

On 2010-03-26, pdrahn@coinet.com <co_farmer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 25, 6:50?pm, Ignoramus30639 <ignoramus30...@NOSPAM.
> 30639.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2010-03-26, Ignoramus30639 <ignoramus30...@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> > pictures
>>
>> >http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Western-Snow-Plow/
>>
>> Oh, and the truck is Chevy Silverado 2500HD, with a gas engine.
>>
>> How would it survive snow plowing?
>>
>> i
>
> Is that a 4X4?
> Paul

Yes, 4x4

== 13 of 13 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 7:11 pm
From: Ignoramus30639

On 2010-03-26, Pete C. <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote:
>
> Ignoramus30639 wrote:
>>
>> On 2010-03-26, Ignoramus30639 <ignoramus30639@NOSPAM.30639.invalid> wrote:
>> > pictures
>> >
>> > http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/Western-Snow-Plow/
>>
>> Oh, and the truck is Chevy Silverado 2500HD, with a gas engine.
>>
>> How would it survive snow plowing?
>>
>> i
>
> Looks good, I see it has power angle as well as lift, just what you
> want.
>
> If the truck doesn't have the snow plow prep option, you need to add an
> extra transmission cooler and may need a front suspension upgrade to
> handle the extra weight of the plow without sagging too much. If you're
> just doing your driveway the later may not be an issue.

OK, I will try to find out. I thought I had a snow plow prep option,
but now I am not sure. I guess I will call the Chevy dealer.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Who will be the first?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/f434d5963fd21822?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:09 pm
From: "Ed Huntress"

"Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote in message
news:4bac03c3$0$29776$ec3e2dad@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
>
> Ed Huntress wrote:
>>
>> "Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote in message
>> news:4babf3f3$0$29736$ec3e2dad@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
>> >
>> > Ed Huntress wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:4baab692$0$17595$ec3e2dad@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > Ed Huntress wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:4baaab63$0$29760$ec3e2dad@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Ed Huntress wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "RBnDFW" <burkheimer@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> news:hoda99$3vt$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> >> >> >> > Don Foreman wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:51:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
>> >> >> >> >> <cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >>> I will be watching with interest, and with a lot of
>> >> >> >> >>> distance.
>> >> >> >> >>> While I
>> >> >> >> >>> support liberty, and the Constitution, I'm also not
>> >> >> >> >>> interested
>> >> >> >> >>> in
>> >> >> >> >>> challenging the power of the US Government.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Challenge of the government is essential to democracy. Fear
>> >> >> >> >> of
>> >> >> >> >> retribution for challenge of government is clear evidence of
>> >> >> >> >> submission to and acceptance of tyranny.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Very well put, don.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> That's not to say that challenges should be by fire. That's
>> >> >> >> >> revolution
>> >> >> >> >> or anarchy, doomed to fail against vastly superior force
>> >> >> >> >> unless
>> >> >> >> >> done
>> >> >> >> >> with considerably more coordination and fieldcraft than is
>> >> >> >> >> evident
>> >> >> >> >> among noisy dissidents clamoring for attention or trolling on
>> >> >> >> >> usenet.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > There was a time about 200 years ago that a rabble assembled
>> >> >> >> > into
>> >> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> > formidable force.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> That was around the time that George Washington marched 16,000
>> >> >> >> federalized
>> >> >> >> militiamen into western PA, put down the Whiskey Rebellion, and
>> >> >> >> indicted
>> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> bunch of them for treason, wasn't it?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Are you wishing for a repeat?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> --
>> >> >> >> Ed Huntress
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Say what you want about your beloved founders, constitution,
>> >> >> > laws,
>> >> >> > etc.,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thank you, I will. I think very highly of them -- unlike the
>> >> >> phonies
>> >> >> here
>> >> >> who make up fantastical tales about endless usurpations and create
>> >> >> fantasies
>> >> >> for themselves of becoming terrorists from within.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > but having watched world events in recent years, can you honestly
>> >> >> > say
>> >> >> > that you think the US government could withstand a home-soil
>> >> >> > insurgency
>> >> >> > of even 10,000 (0.001% of the population) coordinated, committed
>> >> >> > insurgents? I'm not so sure.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Yes. The Sons of Timothy McVeigh would find out in a hurry that
>> >> >> most
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> us
>> >> >> would do everything we could to help wipe them out. Out-of-shape
>> >> >> blowhards,
>> >> >> largely ignorant, stupid, and delusional, and much too impressed
>> >> >> with
>> >> >> their
>> >> >> own skills and abilities, the "insurgents" would never have a
>> >> >> chance
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> coordinate before they were found out and suppressed. And their
>> >> >> commitment
>> >> >> would collapse in a heartbeat when they saw the trouble they'd
>> >> >> unleashed.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That's the reality.
>> >> >
>> >> > The reality is that the US has completely lost the national
>> >> > cohesiveness
>> >> > that allowed it to win WWII, which is why we have essentially lost
>> >> > every
>> >> > war since then and are loosing the two or three we are currently
>> >> > bogged
>> >> > down in.
>> >> >
>> >> > In the time since WWII, a lot has been learned about waging an
>> >> > asymmetric war, except how to effectively counter one. We've been
>> >> > fighting an asymmetric war in Iraq and Afghanistan for quite some
>> >> > time
>> >> > now and not really making much progress.
>> >> >
>> >> > Iraq / Afghanistan is an asymmetric war on foreign soil where our
>> >> > troops
>> >> > have no personal loyalties. As we've seen trying to get Iraqi and
>> >> > Afghan
>> >> > troops mustered to support their own governments, personal loyalties
>> >> > are
>> >> > a big problem in fighting an asymmetric war on your own home soil.
>> >> >
>> >> > We have also seen that various foreign countries are quite willing
>> >> > to
>> >> > support such an insurgency if it seems to further their aims. The US
>> >> > has
>> >> > of course done the exact same thing in the past, supporting such
>> >> > groups
>> >> > as the Talliban when it seemed to further our aims in fighting a
>> >> > proxy
>> >> > war with Russia.
>> >> >
>> >> > You like to point to a few kooks like McVeigh and convince yourself
>> >> > that
>> >> > all potential internal threats are of that ilk, but I don't see that
>> >> > as
>> >> > being the case. If you look at the many cases of attacks in the US
>> >> > by
>> >> > environmental or animal rights terrorists, you find a very different
>> >> > picture of perpetrators who blend in, who have supporters who will
>> >> > assist them and who in a great many cases have not been identified
>> >> > or
>> >> > prosecuted.
>> >> >
>> >> > It is important to note that most of the perpetrators of the
>> >> > environmental and animal terrorism fit closely with the profile of
>> >> > the
>> >> > terrorists and insurgents you see in Iraq and Afghanistan, young,
>> >> > angry
>> >> > and disillusioned and with a cause they have convinced themselves
>> >> > justifies violent attacks.
>> >> >
>> >> > I think the most likely source of an insurgency is not from
>> >> > geriatric
>> >> > anti-government ranters on newsgroups, but rather from a relatively
>> >> > young group with a religious or religion like ideology.
>> >>
>> >> The animals rightists have been rattling their swords for 40 years. So
>> >> far,
>> >> the republic remains safe from them.
>> >>
>> >> The other groups are something like them -- mumblers and grumblers,
>> >> with
>> >> a
>> >> few freaks among them who do something violent, but mostly without a
>> >> lot
>> >> of
>> >> brains, and 'way short on balls.
>> >
>> > I see you missed or chose to ignore the substance of what I wrote.
>> > Head-in-sand has been proven to be an ineffective strategy.
>>
>> I'm sorry Pete, but the ideas relating to what the US might face were so
>> weird and off-the-wall that I thought it would be better not to tell you
>> what I think about it.
>>
>> It sounds like you're anticipating an asymmetric war with home-grown
>> terrorists and youth death squads that are organizing in church basements
>> as
>> we speak.
>
> Interesting since that is exactly the situation you have in the middle
> east, yet you think somehow it couldn't happen here.

It's bizarre that you think your fellow Americans are as vulnerable to
superstitious nonsense and value life as little as the members of Al Queda,
and would form death squads to cleanse the country for the True Believers.

If you believe that, you must not think very much of your countrymen. You
certainly wouldn't trust them to own guns. Are you sure you're in the right
country here, Pete?

>
>>
>> The short take is that I think you guys have lost a few of your marbles.
>
> And I think you are blinding yourself to possibilities you don't want to
> consider.

I'm working on more likely scenarios, like an invasion from Alpha Centauri.

--
Ed Huntress

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:26 pm
From: "Pete C."

Ed Huntress wrote:
>
> "Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote in message
> news:4bac03c3$0$29776$ec3e2dad@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
> >
> > Ed Huntress wrote:
> >>
> >> "Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote in message
> >> news:4babf3f3$0$29736$ec3e2dad@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
> >> >
> >> > Ed Huntress wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> "Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote in message
> >> >> news:4baab692$0$17595$ec3e2dad@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Ed Huntress wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Pete C." <aux3.DOH.4@snet.net> wrote in message
> >> >> >> news:4baaab63$0$29760$ec3e2dad@unlimited.usenetmonster.com...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Ed Huntress wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "RBnDFW" <burkheimer@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> news:hoda99$3vt$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> >> >> >> >> > Don Foreman wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:51:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
> >> >> >> >> >> <cayoung61**spamblock##@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >>> I will be watching with interest, and with a lot of
> >> >> >> >> >>> distance.
> >> >> >> >> >>> While I
> >> >> >> >> >>> support liberty, and the Constitution, I'm also not
> >> >> >> >> >>> interested
> >> >> >> >> >>> in
> >> >> >> >> >>> challenging the power of the US Government.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Challenge of the government is essential to democracy. Fear
> >> >> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> >> >> retribution for challenge of government is clear evidence of
> >> >> >> >> >> submission to and acceptance of tyranny.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Very well put, don.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> That's not to say that challenges should be by fire. That's
> >> >> >> >> >> revolution
> >> >> >> >> >> or anarchy, doomed to fail against vastly superior force
> >> >> >> >> >> unless
> >> >> >> >> >> done
> >> >> >> >> >> with considerably more coordination and fieldcraft than is
> >> >> >> >> >> evident
> >> >> >> >> >> among noisy dissidents clamoring for attention or trolling on
> >> >> >> >> >> usenet.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > There was a time about 200 years ago that a rabble assembled
> >> >> >> >> > into
> >> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> > formidable force.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> That was around the time that George Washington marched 16,000
> >> >> >> >> federalized
> >> >> >> >> militiamen into western PA, put down the Whiskey Rebellion, and
> >> >> >> >> indicted
> >> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> bunch of them for treason, wasn't it?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Are you wishing for a repeat?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> >> Ed Huntress
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Say what you want about your beloved founders, constitution,
> >> >> >> > laws,
> >> >> >> > etc.,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thank you, I will. I think very highly of them -- unlike the
> >> >> >> phonies
> >> >> >> here
> >> >> >> who make up fantastical tales about endless usurpations and create
> >> >> >> fantasies
> >> >> >> for themselves of becoming terrorists from within.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > but having watched world events in recent years, can you honestly
> >> >> >> > say
> >> >> >> > that you think the US government could withstand a home-soil
> >> >> >> > insurgency
> >> >> >> > of even 10,000 (0.001% of the population) coordinated, committed
> >> >> >> > insurgents? I'm not so sure.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Yes. The Sons of Timothy McVeigh would find out in a hurry that
> >> >> >> most
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> us
> >> >> >> would do everything we could to help wipe them out. Out-of-shape
> >> >> >> blowhards,
> >> >> >> largely ignorant, stupid, and delusional, and much too impressed
> >> >> >> with
> >> >> >> their
> >> >> >> own skills and abilities, the "insurgents" would never have a
> >> >> >> chance
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> coordinate before they were found out and suppressed. And their
> >> >> >> commitment
> >> >> >> would collapse in a heartbeat when they saw the trouble they'd
> >> >> >> unleashed.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> That's the reality.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The reality is that the US has completely lost the national
> >> >> > cohesiveness
> >> >> > that allowed it to win WWII, which is why we have essentially lost
> >> >> > every
> >> >> > war since then and are loosing the two or three we are currently
> >> >> > bogged
> >> >> > down in.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > In the time since WWII, a lot has been learned about waging an
> >> >> > asymmetric war, except how to effectively counter one. We've been
> >> >> > fighting an asymmetric war in Iraq and Afghanistan for quite some
> >> >> > time
> >> >> > now and not really making much progress.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Iraq / Afghanistan is an asymmetric war on foreign soil where our
> >> >> > troops
> >> >> > have no personal loyalties. As we've seen trying to get Iraqi and
> >> >> > Afghan
> >> >> > troops mustered to support their own governments, personal loyalties
> >> >> > are
> >> >> > a big problem in fighting an asymmetric war on your own home soil.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > We have also seen that various foreign countries are quite willing
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > support such an insurgency if it seems to further their aims. The US
> >> >> > has
> >> >> > of course done the exact same thing in the past, supporting such
> >> >> > groups
> >> >> > as the Talliban when it seemed to further our aims in fighting a
> >> >> > proxy
> >> >> > war with Russia.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You like to point to a few kooks like McVeigh and convince yourself
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > all potential internal threats are of that ilk, but I don't see that
> >> >> > as
> >> >> > being the case. If you look at the many cases of attacks in the US
> >> >> > by
> >> >> > environmental or animal rights terrorists, you find a very different
> >> >> > picture of perpetrators who blend in, who have supporters who will
> >> >> > assist them and who in a great many cases have not been identified
> >> >> > or
> >> >> > prosecuted.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It is important to note that most of the perpetrators of the
> >> >> > environmental and animal terrorism fit closely with the profile of
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > terrorists and insurgents you see in Iraq and Afghanistan, young,
> >> >> > angry
> >> >> > and disillusioned and with a cause they have convinced themselves
> >> >> > justifies violent attacks.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I think the most likely source of an insurgency is not from
> >> >> > geriatric
> >> >> > anti-government ranters on newsgroups, but rather from a relatively
> >> >> > young group with a religious or religion like ideology.
> >> >>
> >> >> The animals rightists have been rattling their swords for 40 years. So
> >> >> far,
> >> >> the republic remains safe from them.
> >> >>
> >> >> The other groups are something like them -- mumblers and grumblers,
> >> >> with
> >> >> a
> >> >> few freaks among them who do something violent, but mostly without a
> >> >> lot
> >> >> of
> >> >> brains, and 'way short on balls.
> >> >
> >> > I see you missed or chose to ignore the substance of what I wrote.
> >> > Head-in-sand has been proven to be an ineffective strategy.
> >>
> >> I'm sorry Pete, but the ideas relating to what the US might face were so
> >> weird and off-the-wall that I thought it would be better not to tell you
> >> what I think about it.
> >>
> >> It sounds like you're anticipating an asymmetric war with home-grown
> >> terrorists and youth death squads that are organizing in church basements
> >> as
> >> we speak.
> >
> > Interesting since that is exactly the situation you have in the middle
> > east, yet you think somehow it couldn't happen here.
>
> It's bizarre that you think your fellow Americans are as vulnerable to
> superstitious nonsense and value life as little as the members of Al Queda,
> and would form death squads to cleanse the country for the True Believers.
>
> If you believe that, you must not think very much of your countrymen. You
> certainly wouldn't trust them to own guns. Are you sure you're in the right
> country here, Pete?

From my centrist position, I see generations of kids being told that the
religion that is being imposed on them is under attack and they need to
fight it. I see successive generations becoming more extremist in their
views.

I think that another decade or two down the line as the islamist threat
inches closer due to the governments inability to deal with the
situation, these generations who have been brainwashed day after day
could become so terrified of the threat that they decide they need a new
crusade to oust the ineffective government and deal with the islamst
threat.

The fact that out current military personnel is largely from these same
generations and communities of true believers compounds the situation
and brings the same prospects of personal loyalties overriding national
loyalties as seen in Iraq and Afghanistan with their own troops.

>
> >
> >>
> >> The short take is that I think you guys have lost a few of your marbles.
> >
> > And I think you are blinding yourself to possibilities you don't want to
> > consider.
>
> I'm working on more likely scenarios, like an invasion from Alpha Centauri.

No, you're avoiding thinking honestly about uncomfortable possibilities.

I'd be quite happy if I'm wrong or at least if we don't see something
like this in my lifetime, but I think the probability is non-zero.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Rush to flee US
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/589453ba81b739ca?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 7:17 pm
From: "John R. Carroll"

Ed Huntress wrote:
> "John R. Carroll" <nunya@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in message
> news:_MidnRHY6bHaQDbWnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> Ed Huntress wrote:
>>> "John R. Carroll" <jcarroll@ubu,machiningsolution.com> wrote in
>>> message news:oPqdnQPc75uAyzbWnZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>
>>>> "Ed Huntress" <huntres23@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:4ba9ff0e$0$31281$607ed4bc@cv.net...
>>>>>
>>>>> "John R. Carroll" <nunya@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in message
>>>>> news:h4idnUYDXJ7YFTTWnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>>> Ed Huntress wrote:
>>>>>>> "John R. Carroll" <jcarroll@ubu,machiningsolution.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> message news:_Y-dncS77et8_TTWnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Ed Huntress" <huntres23@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:4ba95f68$0$22506$607ed4bc@cv.net...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "John R. Carroll" <jcarroll@ubu,machiningsolution.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>> in message
>>>>>>>>> news:FbudnTjqIancwzTWnZ2dnUVZ_qudnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Ed Huntress" <huntres23@optonline.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:4ba95d17$0$22518$607ed4bc@cv.net...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Ignoramus15798" <ignoramus15798@NOSPAM.15798.invalid> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:X7udncG0HNrexDTWnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not know that there was such a rush to flee US.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Talk Radio just won another round.
>>>>>>>> If you want to see something interesting, have a look at the
>>>>>>>> list of advertisers for Savage, Beck and Limbaugh.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> JC
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I didn't see anything useful. Do you have a link to some
>>>>>>> analysis of the advertisers?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Current Advertisers ( 8/9/09 )
>>>>
>>>> 60Plus.org
>>>> AARP Insurance
>>>> Accu Chek Aviva
>>>> ADT Security
>>>> Ally Bank (allybank.com)
>>>> Avodart
>>>> Brita Filter
>>>> Broadbive Security
>>>> Conservatives for Patients Rights
>>>> Ditech (ditech.com)
>>>> Forex.com
>>>> Golden Corral
>>>> Healthy Choice
>>>> HSBC Life Insurance
>>>> Mens Warehouse
>>>> Mercedes-Benz
>>>> Metastock
>>>> Nexium
>>>> Pepboys
>>>> Radio Shack
>>>> Rapid Wash
>>>> Red Lobster
>>>> Sargento Cheese
>>>> Super8 motels (super8.com)
>>>> Superior Gold Group
>>>> United Healthcare Insurance
>>>> United States Postal Service
>>>> Wallstreet Journal
>>>> Weitz&Luxemburg
>>>>
>>>> JC
>>>
>>> 'Not sure what to make of those. I see some psychographic patterns
>>> but those particular advertisers are probably buying on demographics
>>> and costs. Psychographics mean more in fashion, style, some food
>>> items, and related products and services.
>>>
>>> Anyway, Fox runs up big numbers and decent demos, as I mentioned,
>>> and their rates are competitive. I've never really looked into the
>>> ad buying patterns for radio talk shows. Someone who's in the ad
>>> game today probably can see something there that escapes me.
>>
>> I was just following up on something I'd heard or read about Beck's
>> effect on Fox.
>> Have a look at the link I posted.
>> Fox overtook CNN in ad revenue in 2008 (566 million/556 million) but
>> I think
>> it's flipped over again.
>>
>> --
>> John R. Carroll
>
> I'm feeling dumb here, John, but the link led me to a three-year-old
> petition. I can't find anything else there.

Cancellations [Beck/FOX]
Aegon Insurance [Beck]
Ally Bank (GMAC)
Ancestry.com
Applebees
AshleyFurniture.com [Beck]
AT&T
Bank of America
Bell & Howell
Best Buy
Binder & Binder [Beck]
Blaine Labs
Brez (Airware)
Broadview Security
Campbell's Soup
Capital One [Beck]
Clorox
Closing.com [Beck]
CLR Cleaner (Jelmar) [Beck]
ConAgra
CVS
Dannon [Beck]
Diabetes Care Club (Simplex) [Beck]
DirecTV
Discover [Beck]
DITECH.com
Elations.com
Farmers Insurance
FreeCreditReport.com (Experian)
Geico
General Mills
GoToMeeting.com (Citrix) [Beck]
Healthy Choice (Conagra)
HSBC [Beck]
Humana [Beck]
ICAN Benefit Group [Beck]
Infiniti [Beck]
Johnson & Johnson
Jordan McKenna Debt Counseling [Beck]
Kraft Foods
Lawyers.com
Lowe's
Mens Wearhouse
Mercedes-Benz USA [Beck]
Nutrisystem
PearleVision/Lenscrafters (Luxottica) [Beck]
Proctor & Gamble
Progressive Insurance
Radio Shack
Re-Bath
Regions
Restatis (Allergan)
Roche
S.C. Johnson
SAM (Store and Move)
Sanofi-Aventis
SpendOnLife.com [FOX]
Sprint
State Farm
Sargento Cheese
TheElationsCo
Travelers Insurance
Travelocity
Tylenol
UPS
US Postal Service [Beck]
Verizon Wireless
Vonage
Walmart
Wyeth [Beck] Our targets (9/9/09)
Accu-Chek (Roche)
Bosley.com
BuyWaterJet.com
CancerCenter.com
Carbonite.com
Cash4Gold.com
Consumer Debt Advocate
Cooney & Conway
EasyWater.com (Freije)
EmpireToday.com
EncoreDental.com
Hydrolyze
Inhalerette
Johnson Law Group
JosBank.com
LearCapital.com
LibertyMedical.com
Merit Financial
MikeBloomberg.com
NecklineSlimmer.com
OxiClean
PulaskiLawFirm.com
RoslandCapital.com
Sandals.com
ServPro.com
SmartBalance
TDAmeritrade
TheScooterStore.com
TheVillages.com
TopDot.com
VeteranMeso.com
VideoProfessor.com
WilensAndBaker.com
ZeroWater.com

--
John R. Carroll

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 7:47 pm
From: "William Wixon"

"Ed Huntress" <huntres23@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4bac07b0$0$22541$607ed4bc@cv.net...
>
> "Gunner Asch" <gunnerasch@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:v1unq5pr7dr7571b34eqohtm7sktq77n0o@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:20:47 -0500, Wes <clutch@lycos.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Hawke <davesmithers@digitalpath.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I was going to say he can't go to Africa. They have too many blacks
>>>>there for him.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Bo Snerdly, obviously not his real name, is the call screener. He is
>>>Black. A Black
>>>Conservative.
>>>
>>>Rush is color blind, every color under the sun is fine with him as long
>>>as that person has
>>>a Conservative perspective.
>>>
>>>From your comment, I get the impression that you, Hawke, are the racist.
>>>
>>>Wes
>>
>>
>> Indeed. I agree with Wes 100%
>
> Right. Playing "Barack the Magic Negro" as a theme song isn't racist at
> all. Nossirree.
>
> Among the Limberbutt classics is "The NAACP should have riot rehearsal.
> They should get a liquor store and practice robberies."
>
> And my all-time favorite, to a female caller who sounded African-American,
> "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back."
>
> Not a racist bone in that drug-addict's body. Nope...'in the market for a
> bridge, by any chance?
>
> --
> Ed Huntress
>
>

for a moment i was remembering incorrectly the incident where the republican
talk show comedian went to a restaurant in harlem and commented "they're
just like us" was limbag, was o'reilly.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200709210007

b.w.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Would you buy a new Toyota?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/92b2cda20b50e86b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:28 pm
From: cavelamb

I came across this interesting video demonstration at
Consumer Reports.

http://consumerist.com/2010/03/how-does-brake-override-technology-work-in-cars.html

I have to admit, I would probably have pumped the breaks...

BAD mistake.

And might be at the root of all this fuss?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Reading RCM via Mac?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/903342897565e9ff?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:28 pm
From: Steve Ackman

In <4babc20e$0$1664$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, on 25 Mar 2010 20:05:34 GMT,
steamer, steamer@sonic.net wrote:

> --A pal of mine was wondering what other Mac users prefer for
> reading usenet. I'm on the PC side of the fence using putty and haven't a
> clue what's on the Mac side.
> Suggestions welcome and I'll pass 'em along to my pal

I'm not on the Mac or PC side of the fence, but I
use slrn... which is available in an older binary
version for Mac, or much newer if your pal chooses to
compile from source.
http://slrn.org

--
☯☯

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 7:03 pm
From: Steve Ackman

In <4babc20e$0$1664$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, on 25 Mar 2010 20:05:34 GMT,
steamer, steamer@sonic.net wrote:
> --A pal of mine was wondering what other Mac users prefer for
> reading usenet. I'm on the PC side of the fence using putty and haven't a
> clue what's on the Mac side.
> Suggestions welcome and I'll pass 'em along to my pal

Looks like MT-NewsWatcher is the most popular Mac
reader used to post here. Then there's Thoth and Unison
that are specific to Mac... and the Mozilla family that
covers just about any platform.
slrn can be run on Mac OSX, as I'm sure many of the
other "Unix" newsreaders can. Pan and XPN, for
instance, both have been.

A page about a variety of Mac newsreaders,
http://www.newsreaders.com/mac/clients.html

Number of posts made by User Agent (broken down by
version) over the last 10,000 posts to RCM:

929 User-Agent: G2/1.0
907 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843
515 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
394 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
325 User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-11 (Linux)
316 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
221 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 5.00/32.1171
207 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 12.0.1606
204 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 5.00/32.1170
200 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
168 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
152 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.2/32.830
125 User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1pl1 (SunOS)
122 User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
107 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Win95; U)
98 X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.92/32.572
97 User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (PPC Mac OS X)
96 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1983
84 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1
75 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
72 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726
67 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213)
61 User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-16 (Linux)
61 User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies)
60 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100216 Thunderbird/3.0.2
55 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6001.18000
53 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16386
48 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090812)
46 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
39 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3598
38 User-Agent: Xnews/2006.08.24
35 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0
32 X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.01
32 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18005
31 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020921 Netscape/7.0
27 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
27 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
24 X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.11/32.235
24 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.18) Gecko/20081031 SeaMonkey/1.1.13
21 User-Agent: tin/1.7.10-20050929 ("Tahay") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.37.5 (i686))
21 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090605 SeaMonkey/1.1.17
20 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
19 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090107)
18 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100104 SeaMonkey/2.0.2
17 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812)
17 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1
15 X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 2.0/32.652
15 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080213)
15 User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (Intel Mac OS X)
14 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.1/32.783
13 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i586)
12 User-Agent: tin/1.8.3-20070201 ("Scotasay") (UNIX) (NetBSD/5.0.1 (i386))
12 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100205 SeaMonkey/2.0.3
12 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100104 SeaMonkey/2.0.2
12 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
11 X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001)
11 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
10 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100205 SeaMonkey/2.0.3
9 User-Agent: Pan/0.132 (Waxed in Black)
8 User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.3 (OS/2)
8 User-Agent: aseriesoftubes
8 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090721 Shredder/3.0b3
8 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
7 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
7 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
7 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
6 X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.14 (x86 32bit)
6 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
6 User-Agent: nn/6.7.3
6 User-Agent: Thoth/1.8.1 (Carbon/OS X)
6 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100216 Thunderbird/3.0.2
6 User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (PPC Mac OS X)
5 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8050.1202
5 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.4548
5 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
5 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1117
5 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.640
5 User-Agent: Xnews/06.08.25
5 User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table)
5 User-Agent: MyNewsGroups \:\) v 0.6
5 User-Agent: Bash Script V0.82
4 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452
4 User-Agent: slrn/0.9.5.4 (UNIX)
4 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.18) Gecko/20081031 SeaMonkey/1.1.13 Mnenhy/0.7.6.0
4 User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
4 User-Agent: KNode/0.9.2
4 User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
3 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478
3 X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7
3 X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 3.3/32.846
3 User-Agent: MyNewsGroups :) v 0.6
3 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3
3 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1
3 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
3 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060414
3 User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b2 (Intel Mac OS X)
3 User-Agent: Hogwasher/4.3
2 X-Newsreader: knews 1.0c.0
2 X-Newsreader: News Rover 14.2.2
2 X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
2 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186 trialware
2 User-Agent: slrn/0.9.6.3 (SunOS)
2 User-Agent: Unison/1.7.7
2 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01
2 User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.60.2060
2 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4
1 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8064.206
1 X-Newsreader: JetBrains Omea Reader 1098.1
1 X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 3.2/32.830
1 User-Agent: slrn/0.9.9p1 (FreeBSD)
1 User-Agent: Xnews/2006.08.05
1 User-Agent: Turnpike/6.05-M (<MLtYYGYAhvABGc$yPEasOJlKHs>)
1 User-Agent: Thunderbird 3.0a1pre (Windows/2008022014)
1 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
1 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320)
1 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090318)
1 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
1 User-Agent: Thoth/1.8.4 (Carbon/OS X)
1 User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2 (This is not a psychotic episode. It's a cleansing moment of clarity.)
1 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100104 SeaMonkey/2.0.2
1 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1 ThunderBrowse/3.2.8.1
1 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1
1 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090605 SeaMonkey/1.1.17
1 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0
1 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
1 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.8.1.13) Gecko/20080313 SeaMonkey/1.1.9
1 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1
1 User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.9.14
1 User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.71.8
1 User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/2.70.2067
1 User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (PPC Mac OS X) may be the problem. I
1 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.9
1 User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.14eol (X11/20080724)
1 User-Agent: Hamster-Pg/1.13
1 User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 Hamster/2.1.0.11

--
☯☯

==============================================================================
TOPIC: DIY surge protection...
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/fa560b93f2504a9b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:39 pm
From: westom

On Mar 25, 1:43 pm, "Twayne" <nob...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> Earth ground is NOT the most critical protection object. It
> isn't even necessary for protection from longitudinal surges,
> in fact. This is a mess of guesses with an attempt to
> hopefully sound like you know what you're
> talking about, but you don't.

So why do all telcos require their protectors connected from each
wire to earth? Why does every telco bring every wire into underground
vaults where a protector connects within feet to earth - for
longitudinal mode transients? And why has this been the routine
solution for over 100 years?

Why does the NIST say grounding is required for protection?
> You cannot really suppress a surge altogether, nor "arrest" it.
> What these protective devices do is neither suppress nor
> arrest a surge, but simply divert it to ground, where it can
> do no harm.

So the NIST also has it wrong?

IEEE Standard 141 (Red Book) says:
> In actual practice, lightning protection is achieve by the process
> of interception of lightning produced surges, diverting them to
> ground, and by altering their associated wave shapes.

What is lightning? A longitudinal mode surge. So the NIST is
wrong. The IEEE is wrong. The US Air Force is also wrong when
protector are required to located as close to where wires enter the
building and earth ground?

Instead of posted anything technical, you also post insults? Of
course. That is what the less technically informed do. Where is this
IEEE paper that shows longitudinal mode protection is without earth
ground? Every paper I read is always about earth ground. Even this
professional's application note says every wire must connect to earth
before entering the building. But since you know better, then the
professional is lying? We should believe you only because you can
insult?

From Compliance Engineering entitled "Resettable Circuit Protection
for Telecom Network Equipment" is:
> In longitudinal mode, the overstress is present between tip-and-
ring
> and ground. Longitudinal overstresses are the most common and
> occur during power induction or power crosses in which both
> conductors have the same exposure to the hazard. Lightning-induced
> overstresses are typically longitudinal

IOW longitudinal surges seek earth ground destructively via
electronics. How do you stop it? Do you magically stop what even
three miles of sky could not? Of course not. Do you magically make
that energy just disappear? Of course not. The routine solution for
over 100 years is to do even what Ben Franklin lightning rods do.
Connect the longitudinal mode surge to earth. The energy is not
inside the building hunting for earth ground destructively via
appliances.

The NIST says how critical earth ground is:
> A very important point to keep in mind is that your surge protector will work
> by diverting the surges to ground. The best surge protection in the world
> can be useless if grounding is not done properly.

So, if earth ground is not important, then Franklin was wrong to
earth his lightning rods? That is what you have posted. Franklin's
lightning rods work because lightning - a longitudinal mode surge - is
connected to earth. - where energy is harmlessly dissipated. Where is
that energy absorbed if not in earth? Please, show me this magic
device that can stop what three miles of sky cannot. That will
magically absorb hundreds of thousands of joules? When surge
protection is always about earth ground, how do you know they are
wrong? Because you can post venom?

Why do the same technically naive naysayers routinely post so nasty?

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:41 pm
From: westom

So the NIST also has it wrong?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Thread cutting history book on Gutenberg
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/c28697566f358480?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:48 pm
From: "Paul Hovnanian P.E."

Jim Wilkins wrote:
>
> http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/31756
>
> jsw

It looks like a pretty twisted tale.

--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer: Eight. Twelve if the light bulb is cross-threaded.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Machine safety
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/c8ed0e0e3ad0e725?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 6:57 pm
From: cncmillgil

On Mar 25, 6:15 pm, Kirk Gordon <k...@gordon-eng2.com> wrote:
> cncmillgil wrote:
> > Wonder if this could be implemented on other machine tools?
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3mzhvMgrLE&NR=1
>
> > --
>
> > BB's #37
> > Smoothly said
> > Easily read
> > That s the goal
> > From this troll
>
> >
> > ~gil~
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/HoldzemOnEbay
>
> I see some potential problems, even on a table saw; but the device
> only works because the blade is relatively light. Try doing an instant
> stop with a 200 lb. lathe spindle and 60 lb. chuck, and the whole
> machine would probably roll over and crush you to death.
>
> KG

seen lathe chucks roll across the floor almost crushing toes, running
in reverse -unthreading from the spinldle. Guess thats a good reason
to have the cam lock pins?<g>

BB's #15m
What's real is real
What's not is snot
Blow your fat nose
Remove a causality snot

©¿©
~gil~

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Republican losing streak continues
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/t/acd15706db55f813?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Mar 25 2010 8:14 pm
From: "John R. Carroll"

RogerN wrote:
> "John R. Carroll" <nunya@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in message
> news:4uadnY5wT-3bdTbWnZ2dnUVZ_rudnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> RogerN wrote:
>>> "rangerssuck" <rangerssuck@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
news:77d0c54f-b532-4165-960b-2e9cce0d3e55@r27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Mar 25, 1:23 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>>>> "rangerssuck" <rangerss...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>
news:32fc54fa-0339-4cb4-b62b-ec26ee9f54ed@19g2000yqu.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Mar 24, 6:46 am, "RogerN" <re...@midwest.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> "Too_Many_Tools" <too_many_to...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>>
>> news:61cc1381-1633-4588-ae7d-944fdf7f6d95@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> On Mar 22, 5:03 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:40:05 -0500, Ignoramus7894
>>>>
>>> Then why didn't they want the Stupak abortion ban, if, as you're
>>> claiming, it's already there, "no need for it".
>>
>> Because any amendment to the bill would have required that it be
>> sent back to the Senate to be voted on again Roger.
>> The Senate Republicans would have filibustered the bill.
>>
>>
>>> Did you believe
>>> Nancy Pelosi's lies? Why, when Stupak wanted anti-abortion in the
>>> bill, didn't he get what he wanted instead of Obama signing an
>>> executive order, that he can remove any time?
>>>
>>> I see your point and I thank you for being reasonable, but here's
>>> the facts. They (Pelosi for one) claim that abortion isn't covered
>>> by taxpayer money. Stupak, a Democrat, wants it in writing, just so
>>> there is no question. They refuse to give it to him in writing,
>>> why?
>>
>> Because any amendment to the bill would have required that it be
>> sent back to the Senate to be voted on again Roger.
>> The Senate Republicans would have filibustered the bill.
>
> So Obama would have been held to his bi-partisan promise? How
> terrible!

A filibuster is an entirely partisan practice Roger.

>
>
> But I keep getting people like you or Ed to explain it and take me in
> a full circle back to what I said in the first place. Has
> reconciliation ever been used for this significant of a power grab by
> the Government?

Many times.
Iraq has cost Americans a trillion dollars Roger and that boondogle is just
money pissed away.
The Bush tax cuts, another trillion and bthe were either done through
reconcilliation or supplemental appropriations.

> Is it constitutional for Congress to pass a bill
> mandating citizens to buy something from private companies?

It is.

>Why
> couldn't we wait for a Health Care that the majority wanted?

?
Have you forgotten the Democrats ran health-care reform as one of their
signature issues in 2008 and kicked ass at the polls?
You might also want to have a look at today's polling data Roger.

>Why the
> rush to cram Obamacare down our throats?

15 months of legistlative wrangling after 100 years of discussion isn't my
idea of rushing.

>You explained it but you
> didn't explain it, you explained that if the Democratic Stupak
> amendment was added, it would have to be voted on again, so?

Because any amendment to the bill would have required that it be
sent back to the Senate to be voted on again Roger.
The Senate Republicans would have filibustered the bill.

>Is their something wrong with passing a bill that the majority of
> Americans want, both Democrats and Republicans? But instead Obama
> cancels trips to force his crappy bill upon us.

Obama didn't get a vote on this Roger.
Wrong branch.
He hasn't been a member of the Senate for over a year now.

>Why not vote on a
> basic health care plan that the majority agree on and take the more
> difficult issues separately? Yeah, I know, but isn't what's good for
> our country more important than what any political party wants?

It is, and the Democrats did just exactly that.
Congress will continue to work over health care now that we have a law in
place until the US has a single payer system.
That is the difficult part and it remains to be done. Once it is, the United
States will finally have rejoined the rest of the civilized world.

> Like
> I heard, the only thing bi-partisan about the bill was the opposition
> to it.

Two hundred of the Republican amendments offered in committee are in the
bill that passed Roger.
What Republicans did early on was make a political calculation.
They realized that passage of a bill by a Congress with a majority of
Democrats and signed by a Democrat President would mean to Republicans what
the passage of Social Security meant years back. They didn't get back into
the White House again until Eisenhower.
In other words, they have been trying to protect their political hides, not
pass meaningful legislation.
Between now and November, this is going to become more and more obvious to
voters.
It's an off year election and the economy is down but let me clue you in.
Should the economy be trending upward in a more positive fashion on the jobs
front by the next election, and it almost certainly will, Republicans might
have great difficulty at the polls. The Republican party is also in the
process of eating their own right now Roger.
Just look at Utah and the Republican caucus. They might actually throw out
their Republican INCUMBENT in a fit of pique.

>
> With all the bad laws in this land, I personally feel that something
> this big is worth doing right, even if it takes more time to do it
> right.

I watched John Boehner from the well of the House this evening and he's
apparently back on his meds.
Now that we actually have a law, Congress will work like hell to make sure
that shortcomings are addressed as they are revealed.
That was exactly what he said, but not really what he meant. His threatening
statements regarding defunding were idiocy and he knows it. The apocalypse
predicted didn't materialize and it won't. I'll be interested to see how
Republicans explain away that because the facts aren't on their side, never
were, and won't be going forward.

> Is this about healthcare or about Obama?

Both.

>Or is it about
> political parties? I hope they prove me wrong for the sake of our
> country, I guess all I can do is wait and see.

No, you can vote but thank God, only once.
You can also go out and see how many nut jobs like yourself you can collect
up and get them to the polls as well.

--
John R. Carroll

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.crafts.metalworking"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.crafts.metalworking+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.metalworking/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

twitter

Thursday, March 25, 2010

rec.crafts.metalworking - 25 new messages in 9 topics - digest

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

About Me

Previous Posts