Re: [Leica] Fight at OK Corral

["Don" <don.ro@verizon.net>]

Good day, Erwin:

Facts?  Why should anyone be constrained by facts?  Journalism has
become a total joke and preaches by example that "facts" are of no
import especially if they do not comport with the journalist liberal
slant on virtually all subjects. The words"truth" and "facts" were
deemed irrelevant by a pervert/lying president who for eight years set
the world standard for perversion, lying, and treason, and journalists
as well as businessmen, lawyers, accountants, etc., bought into that
shameful conduct.  That is now part of our heritage and it will take
decades to overcome it because even small children could understand what
was going on, and they noticed the liars always were always rewarded for
their duplicity.  We don't have news reports where reporters report
facts but news shows and the print news columns that should be labeled
"editorial." Journalists are not alone.  They are in good company with
other paid liars who do not rely upon fact but deception and lying as
their stock in trade such as politicians, lawyers and the accountant
"bean counters" as Enron amply demonstrates. Politicians are at the
bottom of the pile since the law even holds, that as a matter of law,
they can not be held to any promises they make. Lawyers every day are
seen in press conferences certifying his client is innocent even though
the tape shows the client shooting the convenience store clerk to death.
We all know what the accountant "bean counters" meant when their
watchword during the 90's was "think outside the box."  Of course, the
"box" was the law so we should not be surprised when greedy business
leaders of America put "thinking outside the box" into action.  These
greedy goughing ones would have had to give some consideration about
landing in jail or risking the loss of their huge fortunes through a
RICO (remember the Federal Racketeering statute?) indictment but the
politicians amended that statute in the 90's to exempt the Enron/Wall
Street type criminals from its reach. And for good reason.  That was a
major source of funds for politicians on both sides of the aisle. So why
should anyone be constrained by "fact?"  Deep down we know the answer,
but "facts" and "truth" are very, very expensive and we are seeing more
and more who are unwilling to pay the price.

We know photos can be made to lie just as readily as politicians,
lawyers, accountants, and business moguls.  Just crop it here and there
and it will tell the desired story regardless of the "facts."

Erwin, do not dispair. The overwhelming majority on the LUG greatly
admire you and your work and value your opinions because in many
instances you do make an effort to back them with "facts" rather than
preconceived notions.

Don R.


Thus jumping on you with no facts is to be expected.
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Erwin Puts" <imxputs@ision.nl>
To: "LUG" <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 6:45 AM
Subject: [Leica] Fight at OK Corral


> RP Johnston remarked (in part)
>
> "Looks like you have taught Erwin how to sling the mud.
Congratulations."
>
> In the five or so years that I have been on the LUG in an increasingly
> passive sense, I have indeed witnessed incredibly bad behaviour and
> uncivilized acts. I have been the target of a long line of
mudslingers. In
> all cases the mud was composed of nasty ad-hominem remarks, combined
often
> with  the accusations of being paid by leica do conduct  their PR.
never
> have anyone of these accusations been based on any evidence or fact.
In fact
> in all situtions the normal legal approach has been turned upside
down.  In
> any civilized society you are not guilty of what you are accused of,
UNLESS
> the accuser can bring credible evidence to support his claims.
> Not so on the LUG: here the law of the wild west rules: who has the
bigger
> gun, is right.
> BD's "facts" were a remark by me about a sewing machine, and some
> superficial reading of my text about my getting the M7 before the
release
> date.  That seems to be good enough on this list to be found guilty
and then
> and this is my point now, I need to defend myself along a long list of
> precise questions provided by the accuser and after that the accuser
has the
> last word noting that now he is satisfied
> and I am free to go. Well in any court in the world this would be
indeed a
> return to the Dark Ages of the Inquisition.
> This then is the law on the LUG:
> accuse somebody without evidence and then you are guilty unless you
yourself
> give evidence to the contrary to be judged on value by the accuser
himself.
>
> That is the gunpoint law: I accuse you of stealing horses and when you
> cannot defend yourself I will hang you. Any defence will be judged by
me.
> Why: I have a gun and you not.
>
> Recently on this list a very nice guy from Sweden (and Swedes are
generally
> very nice) wondered in what situation he found himself. The remarks
were
> very significant: people were proud that this list was a tough place,
where
> rude behaviour was valued as a positive asset of a man, (Go west young
man!)
> and if you were weak of heart, you should find yourself another spot.
It may
> be that some humor was involved here, but the style is important.
>
> I am surprised about this: rude behaviour, unfounded accusations, and
the
> dressing up of any subjective opinion as  facts to suit any persons
goals
> (Truth finding on the Lug we call this procedure), are not only
tolerated
> but the norm of the day.
> But a man as Anthony gets kicked off the list because of bad manners.
> What were his bad manners? used he bad language? did he attack
anybody? did
> he accuse anybody? None of this: he only had the habit of asking
questions
> and was not easy to satisfy. But not one of his posts were about
persons, or
> about accusing persons. He did upset many  on this list as his way of
> discourse was a bit outside what was usual on the list. But in no way
did he
> act uncivilized. And if no one had responded, his questions would have
been
> unanswered. And he had stayed or left.
> But so strong is the collective anger that this man has been expelled
from
> this list, while not conforming to the rule of the game (this is our
town,
> we elected the sheriff and we decide what the law is). But others, and
I
> could make a long list, who behave themselves in a way that is
unacceptable
> according to cultural standards, are applauded.
>
> Well to finish with a comment on the remark by RP Johnston:
> yes I have unfortunately learned to sling mud and the LUG has been the
best
> training camp I have seen.
>
> Erwin
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see
http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html