Your argument in a nutshell is American culture rules and everyone else’s sucks. What an arrogant conceited statement. "Let me point out that America has done more for the freedom of the world than any other country combined." You really don't know your history but you do know your American propaganda. Do a simple google search on "American overthrow of democratic governments" or "covert us regime change" and then reconsider the ridiculous statement "...America has done more for the freedom of the world..." America has done more to undermine its own and the world's security than anyone else in the world. Your statement simply is not the truth according to world history. You will note that most of the countries listed in google are still in the headlines today, thanks to our govt. Sad how you have to revert to statements like "You are not big enough to face them but only from hiding behind the web do you have the courage to speak out" In a debate, only the weak revert to personal attacks. Your understanding of history is only that of American propaganda. Your understanding of history, especially around the civil rights movement is astoundingly ignorant. You forgot about Jim Crow laws starting in 1876. If you understood the Black experience in America things would become much clearer for you. You clearly have no understanding or appreciation of different cultures or that they deserve the same respect we wish to have given ours. Respecting a culture does not mean you agree with it. But we digress. I confronted you on a simple issue; your signature. I don't believe it is applicable in a technical forum and promotes divisiveness and begs for a response which I have given you. Gardenair my apologies for hijacking your thread but felt this was an issue that should be addressed publicly. Best of luck to you Lurkswithin. Imagine the power of knowing how to internet search http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/Teachin...

0

Gardenair wrote "let me know how can i enable Printer from my client computers" You should be able, if lan and internet are working, to simply share your printer on the main pc and install the drivers on the others, then point them to the printer share. Your ip addressing has nothing to do with this unless the only way you can print is via ip port printing. One method of setting peer to peer printing up is install the printer locally but don't do any of the bidirectional testing. Then in ports change lpt1 to \\hostpcname\printersharename Perhaps this link may help http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.... Imagine the power of knowing how to internet search http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/Teachin...

0

I have chosen not to post here any longer but i can't resist this. Wanderer, you are very stupid berkerly left wing radical DICK!! You need to move to Iraq or some other Muslim nation and join Al Queda so you can be validated.

0

wanderer, The difference here is that from my signature, I hold it true as if it were my own, while you use yours as a some self emblazened shield to prove to the world that you might be intelegent: "Imagine the power of knowing how to internet search..." The search perimeters that you threw out are nothing but mostly individual book reviews about distorted historical happenings. They in no way constitute the making of historical fact. But your refernce to the same in America's over throw of DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS made me howl in laughter. Talk about propaganda. That one takes the prize.. *********** coup d’état is the sudden overthrow of a government by a part of the state establishment — usually the military — to replace the branch of the stricken government, either with another civil government or with a military government. ************ Because America supports various coups around the world does not make us the destroyers of democracy as you want people to believe. America has just as much right to protect it's national interest abroad as any other country. Believe it or not....this includes your freedom as well. Of course you will never admit to that till you have no freedom at all because the fanatics were allowed to take over. And I love the statement: "If you understood the Black experience in America things would become much clearer for you." Would that not be better stated as the "Black Perspective" and not experience? What Black experience do you have? Is it right that you relate to the black experience and you are not black at all either! The appreciation of different cultures....back to the mistrued differences of cultures vs. religious beliefs. There is a major difference. Me, I grew up on a ranch where my best friends until the age of 7 were black and brown. Then when we moved they became more brown than black with an ocasional white thrown in. I didn't even know predjudice was a word till I moved to New York and all I heard was "White Boy This! and White Boy That! You see, I was raised that it didn't matter what the color of a person's skin was but how he conducted himself as to what made a man! I have been in some 40 different countries and have witnessed all kinds of attrocities because of your so called cultural beliefs. Where have you been? You are absolutely right, I have no respect for cultural beliefs that are defined by the rich and are designed to keep their own people in ignorance and self denial so that they (the leaders) can enjoy the riches bestowed upon them by an enslaved people. I do have total respect for people trying to edge-out a living in third world countries because their governments and local leaders steal all the support given to them by others. And that they are forced into self (or induced) slavery because of debt or poverty. "You clearly have no understanding or appreciation of different cultures or that they deserve the same respect we wish to have given ours. Respecting a culture does not mean you agree with it." You called me names when you attacked my signature. Is that not part of this same culture knowledge that you seem to be all knowing" or is it that your beliefs are just one sided. A signature is concidered a part of a name, no different than John Q Public or Mahamad. Oh, That doesn't count does it? No, wanderer, you did not degress, you reacted and slammed me by disgracing part of my signature. You did exactly as you planned on doing. The problem lies in that you tried to cover up that un-provoked attack with some quasi-pseudo-antidisestablishmentarianism statements that you haven't a clue as to what you mean. Just spouting words that someone else has put in your mouth. Then to try to gracefully escape you try this appologizing and resorting to some higher than thou plane of existance. My friend Tagged you perfectly. "Clearly, wanderer is a post-modernist (school of Michel Foucault) who believes in moral relativism; that distinctions between good and evil are merely a matter of perspective. Example: "There's no difference between a democratic republic (America) and a totalitarian dictatorship (Iran) - they're just different forms of government." As repulsive and faulty as this reasoning is, there are those who choose to ignore human history and endorse this worldview (e.g., Leftist Democrats, Barack Obama, et al). It is their intellectual foundation for appeasing evil when they see it, or are confronted by it. It permits them to keep their smug "open-minded" view of the world, believing that they see the actions of Mankind from a more "nuanced" perspective. All it really does, of course, is give them an easy way to not make tough choices about the worst instincts and endeavors (be they cultural or governmental) of the human race, while continuing to maintain what they believe is their intellectual superiority." Definition of a Liberal: He has never had to fight for his Freedom He is only good at enjoying it! "IF YOU DON'T STAND BEHIND OUR TROOPS, PLEASE, FEEL FREE TO STAND IN FRONT OF THEM

0

It is always a pleasure debating issues with intellegent informed educated people. Here we are as Americans and we can't even have a civil discussion. Really mature response per, if you were a 14 year old boy which I know you, age wise, are not. Lurkswithin I did not call you names. I thought I was pretty clear I was reputing your statements not you. Really interesting perspective that I "disgraced" your signature. I think its disgraceful to disrespect those whom you identify as "liberals" who also sacrificed to the point of losing their lives to make this country a better place for all. I am glad you got a good laugh about the overthrow of democratic govts by ours. In 1953, the CIA worked with the United Kingdom to overthrow the democratically-elected government of Iran lead by Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh who had attempted to nationalize Iran's oil, threatening the interests of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company The 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état was a covert operation organized by the United States Central Intelligence Agency to overthrow Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán, the democratically-elected President of Guatemala 1960 Patrice Émery Lumumba, an African anti-colonial leader and the first legally elected Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, after he helped to win its independence from Belgium in June 1960, was deposed in a US CIA-sponsored coup during the Congo Crisis.[11] He was subsequently imprisoned and assassinated under controversial circumstances. Sure you will say that is just liberal propaganda but these and a number of South American, African, and other countries certainly don't think so. You might try review their news casts for an interesting perspective of the US. I am sure you believe you are patriotic when you make statements like "liberals have never fought for freedom". That is an unpatriotic statement since it "disgraces" 48.3% of Americans. Concering my signature, it was provided to be helpful since a number of posts here and other tech sites wouldn't even happen if people knew how to do internet searches. Same reason I come here: to be helpful. Is your signature helpful? If you have a better tutorial link I would be happy to use it. Imagine the power of knowing how to internet search http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/Teachin...

0

Wanderer, When you plagiarize someone else's work maybe you should at the least give them credit due....but more than anything else you shouldn't take a notably disputed article to improve your own disposition....kind of shows what you are truly about. 1953 Iranian coup d'état I quote "The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article are disputed." and "This article needs additional citations for verification." from the heading : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_I... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1954_G... 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état You left this part out: "Arbenz's government put forth a number of new policies that the U.S. intelligence community deemed Communist in nature and, suspecting Soviet influence, fueled a fear of Guatemala becoming what Allen Dulles described as a "Soviet beachhead in the western hemisphere". This is the same moronic claptrap that you tried to pull earlier by just throwing some link out there to prove your point. needless to say that this is exactly what was coming from this link...a stated, highly disputed article that requires additional verifiable citations to determine the accuracy of the article. And this is what you defend your statements with. You are such a ridiculously low candidate for any kind of debate. Maybe you have somehow convinced some adolescents with your no nothing about anything superiority...but i think that the good people on this forum see what you are about. This is so typical of spinning the truth to fit your ideology. Why not print the whole story you plagiarized and let the readers decide for their own about what the truth is? But then the fear that someone might be intelligent enough to see the truth just scares the crap out of you doesn't it. Again you have shown that all you are about is half truths and spin on an ideology that you haven't a real clue to what it is about. You started this with an assault on my signature stating that it was a divisive statement. You have yet declared the point of that issue....another cleverly disguised ploy to initiate a argument dealing with total assumptions and half truths. The signature is not the divisive factor here. It is people like you that try to distort the truth in such a fashion that it is totally obscured from normal scrutiny. Definition of a Liberal: He has never had to fight for his Freedom He is only good at enjoying it! "IF YOU DON'T STAND BEHIND OUR TROOPS, PLEASE, FEEL FREE TO STAND IN FRONT OF THEM

0

Note to wanderer: I've followed this thread from the beginning. Your political observations (such as they were) addressed to lurkswithin, started in an intellectual vacuum, then tapered off. They finally degenerated into your desperate attempt to present a false view of recorded history, which lurkswithin completely exposed in his last post. Wanderer, you're out of your depth. No one wants to deny you your right to express yourself, no matter what your political views. I suspect even lurkswithin would stand by your side - though he totally disagrees with you - if anyone tried to silence you. He understands the ultimate importance of free speech. Unfortunately for you and your political observations, his free speech is more intellectually compelling than yours. You've lost the argument. My recommendation would be to gain a formal education in political science. Or, if that is not affordable, obtain a free card at your local library and check out books by accredited authors on the subject. You might not understand, or even agree with, what they've written. But even so, you would not sound more ignorant than you do now. Human Race

0

Thanks a lot guys. It appears to come down to who lives in a political and informational vaccuum. To plagiarize lurkswithin you have to say its yours. No such statement was made. But it really comes down to the fact no one addressed this "I am sure you believe you are patriotic when you make statements like "liberals have never fought for freedom". That is an unpatriotic statement since it "disgraces" 48.3% of Americans." Including those "liberals" serving in the Armed Forces. You certainly can't think everyone in the military is a right wing extremist but perhaps you do. My signature says it all. Have a great life. I sincerely wish you all the best since we are all Americans. Liberal: broad-mindedness, person who favors a political philosophy of progress, reform & protection of civil liberties Extremist: a radical fanatic; holding extreme views, especially on politics

0

"But it really comes down to the fact no one addressed this "I am sure you believe you are patriotic when you make statements like "liberals have never fought for freedom". That is an unpatriotic statement since it "disgraces" 48.3% of Americans." Just another one of your misconstrued way of thinking, wanderer. let me see if i can put it into simplistic terms so that you may have a clear understanding... 1)Liberals are people with an ideology of civil freedoms 2)Liberators are those that liberate others from oggression let us see if I can break it down a bit more One thinks about civil liberties, the other does something about it.... I think that those you have been refering to as liberals are actually liberators who paid the ultimate sacrifice trying to free an oppressed people instead of just sitting around thinking about it... Sir, you are the one that has disgraced them by minimizing their deaths with just the term "Liberal!" a reference to one whose only action is to dream and wish it were so! Definition of a Liberal: He has never had to fight for his Freedom He is only good at enjoying it! "IF YOU DON'T STAND BEHIND OUR TROOPS, PLEASE, FEEL FREE TO STAND IN FRONT OF THEM

0