CDR: RE: Re: Why?

[Phaedrus]

On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Ernest Hua wrote:

> No it's not a viable possibility except for those who see conspiratorial
> agents around every corner.  Try running a large organization some time
> and you will see just what kind of stupid shit you have to deal with.

Hrm. Perhaps I should rephrase -- it's not not-viable because people
aren't so cold blooded that they'd use their own children as a sheild,
because the people in question can use other people's children, instead. 

And thanks, running a 7 sysadmin department was quite enough for me. I
already know humans are stupid.

I'm not completely sure, however, that the difficulties of getting things
done in large organizations kills the possibility of putting child care
centers in places that are likely terrorist targets as human sheilds. It
strikes me as a rather hard thing to argue either way -- organizations
vary as much as individuals do, in my experience.

> if you are working with unioned employees.  Are you suggesting that the
> unions may have been complicit in putting a daycare there?

Well, I suppose if a bunch of unionized employees there wanted a daycare,
this could be the case -- I think it would be doubtful that the union
would want a daycare for human shield purposes...maybe I'm
misunderstanding you, though...

> This sort of suggestion really makes this list look like it's inhabitted by
> a bunch of loonies.  It's your right to suggest any shit you want, but it's
> way out in left field.

You mean, you haven't noticed that this list *is* inhabited by a bunch of
loonies. Largely because insanity is the only sane reaction to an insane
world, I suspect.

You know, other than a somewhat vague 'try running a large organization
sometime' you never did explain why it wasn't viable.


Ph.(still not saying it is or was going on, just arguing the
possibility..hmmph, I need [another] hobby or something)