No, hits=-6.0 required=7.0
	tests=AWL,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,
	      SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
	version=2.50-cvs

No, hits=-3.6 required=7.0
	tests=KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,NOSPAM_INC,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,
	      TO_LOCALPART_EQ_REAL,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_XM,X_ACCEPT_LANG
	version=2.50-cvs

As I've had to resubscribe to fork and fork-noarchive,
I guess I have to reintroduce myself.  I'm formerly
known as gbolcer at endtech dot com to the FoRK
mailman program, formerly an overposter, and love
soaking up bits through avid reading or scanning
of almost every single list that's got informative to say.
Hopefully all those overpost will get cleared out at
somepoint and fork-archived.
Greg

from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
	by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 657D616F03
	for <jm@localhost>; Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:29:47 +0100 (IST)
from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:29:47 +0100 (IST)
from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8GJJZC06421 for <jm@jmason.org>;
    Mon, 16 Sep 2002 20:19:36 +0100
from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id 97E102940CF; Mon, 16 Sep 2002 12:16:04 -0700 (PDT)
from mail.evergo.net (unknown [206.191.151.2]) by xent.com
    (Postfix) with SMTP id BEBD02940CD for <fork@xent.com>; Mon,
    16 Sep 2002 12:15:47 -0700 (PDT)
No, hits=-6.1 required=7.0
	tests=AWL,INVALID_MSGID,IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,
	      QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
	version=2.50-cvs
From fork-admin@xent.com  Tue Sep 17 11:29:48 2002

First, it was my understanding that they had the food before they
refused to pay.  I often have the goods in my possession before I settle
Second, 'not being paid for a little food' is an awfully big deal in
India.  It isn't far from stealing the only food my children have so
I'll have to watch them starve.  The margin of survival is very, very,
So yes.  In my particular reality distortion field 'not paying for a
little food' in India is akin to a direct act of violence intended to
cause suffering if not death on the victims family.  That such an act
triggers a violent response is, IMHO, hardly surprising.
In other words, as far as I could tell the people on the train fired the
With all of that said I still don't know if this happened or not.  Nor
do I know for sure that the margin of survival for those Muslim vendors
> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 11:54 AM
> Subject: Re: Slaughter in the Name of God
> Wow!  It seems you are evaluating this with a large reality distortion
> If the activists on the train refused to pay for food, then the
> shouldn't give it to them.  And the local police force should be
> You have to be operating from a particularly primitive point of view,
> which obviously was in operation with the participants here, to think
> that religious differences or not being paid for a little food (or
> taunting!) was even a remote justification for burning a train full of
> > What I understood was that the activists on the train refused to pay
> > the food and other items they acquired from the Muslim vendors --
> > That may not be true, but it would put things in a more interesting
> > light.  Taking food from a small vendor in India and not paying them
> > It sounded consistent with the ideas and purpose of the train full
> > I'm rarely an apologist for Muslims anywhere.  Yet I find my
> > with the Muslims in this case, even after they burned the train.
> >>From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com] On Behalf Of
> >>Muslims were ready to give it to them. Their murderous attack on the
> >>train-load of VHP activists at Godhra (with its awful, atavistic
> >>of the killings of Hindus and Muslims by the train-load during the
> >>partition riots of 1947) played right into the Hindu extremists'
> Stephen D. Williams, Senior Technical Director