Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Totally Inappropriate.....

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I had vowed to stop and only responded in private, but this narrowminded
view that begins with personal insults demands my response.
As a "scientist" it is your responsibillity to draw conclusions only from
facts not supposition - those "beliefs" that you can support with
substantiated evidence. If your information can be proven unreliable or
incorrect, your conclusions become invalid. I don't resent being called a
"Liberal" if that defines an individual of reasonable intellegence who is
not willing to jump on the bandwagon of public opinion to condemm a person
before they are properly tried. You have, obviously, skipped over other
lessions about incorrect public concensus that destroyed individuals lives.
One of our members reminded you of Richard Jewel who still has the stigma of
being a possible bomber in Atlanta, or the McMartins who were purported to
have abused many children in their daycare center but were vindicated in
court, or those in jail on purgered testimony who are now being freed upon
scientific evidence (DNA testing) of their innocence.
I do take exception to being labled a "Clinton apologist" when I would have
taken this same position for anyone tried and convicted on public opinion
Dig into history - Washingon "purported" to have slept with his best friends
wife, Jefferson fostered a child by one of his slaves, Harding and Cleveland
where "purported" womanizers and adulterers, FDR slept with his wife's
secretary, JFK's "conquests" were not made public until after his death but
he still had to survive the media bashing he got on the Bay of Pigs issue.
Johnson signed the first Equal Rights Amendment, but followed up by sending
thousands to their death by escalation of the most controversial war yet.
Nixon is history - so was his vice-president and advisers during Watergate,
Regan and Bush inherited the Iran Contra Affair. Most have forgotten Oliver
North's involvement, but this will always be a stigma over his head.
Churchill was a known Antisemite, George Wallace a bigot, Rostenkowski (for
those of you in Chicago) a thief, Marion Barry (Washington DC Mayor) a drug
dealer and abuser who is currently back in office.
I could go on for pages and pages.
Still through all of these "indescretions" our country claims to be the
strongest most influential in the world - as well as the most advanced. We
have obviously learned to put aside personal frailties for the advancement
of our societies. These people are condemned on ethical, moral and character
issues by those with other agenda's - political gain. Whether proven or not,
the digging starts because one party wants control at all costs, or because
the minority rule (those who have lost elections) are not satisfied to
accept defeat. Or because you simply did not like Clinton from the start and
decided only to chose those facts that support your side of the argument.
No! What I hate the most is taking a position on protecting the rights
granted us in our constitution and being insulted and labled with inuendo's
and stigma's in order to discredit my opinions.
I would think that the engineering community as a whole are "scientists"
whos responsibility it is to the public to find the truth and not act upon
it until you have all of the facts and evidence to support theory.
When you consider what we read in a paper and hear on the news represents a
microcosm of the total volumes of information on any topic - you would be a
fool to draw any conclusion. First, the news is not an unbiased  medium, nor
are talk shows and television programs. Are you aware that the Republican
party supports the Family Channel and a few other cable stations?
Come on! To attack me publically in this list because I disagree with your
belief is as unethical and improper conduct as becoming a self-professed
expert judge and jury. Your final statement is possibly the most inaccurate
of your post. Intellegent people can only achieve personal opinions based
upon the information that is provided. Intellegent people will disregard
tainted evidence and not consider everything reported publically to be
evidence - which you seem to feel it is.
You stated (so I don't misquote) " I'm sorry, but intelligent people can
draw strong conclusions based on
overwhelming evidence!".  Intellegent people make sure their "evidence" is
substantiated and accurate! The only thing we know from this case is what
has been leaked to the press (possibly out of context) and what the
allegation are! I'll withhold my judgment on the man until and IF the facts
are released. Until then your welcome to your opinion, but don't cross the
line to bash me because I don't agree with you! I made this mistake with
Bill Allen and apologized to him for my mistake. This is what intellegent
people do!

Dennis Wish PE

-----Original Message-----
From: lsmith(--nospam--at) <lsmith(--nospam--at)>
To: seaoc(--nospam--at) <seaoc(--nospam--at)>
Date: Friday, January 30, 1998 5:20 AM
Subject: Totally Inappropriate.....

>Mr. Wish, it is obvious to me that you are a Clinton apologist and, as a
>fellow engineer, I find it disturbing that political affiliation would
>someone to the obvious.  The multiple scandals that have been listed by
>other writers indicate a pattern in Mr. Clinton's life.  An administration
>where people get fired, quit, get jailed (even die) also indicate something
>about Mr. Clinton and his judgement.
>Mr. Clinton himself promised that America would see the most ethical in
>administrations during his Presidency.  (Insert Laugh Track Here)
>As an engineer or scientist, we use available information to formulate a
>hypothesis and a course of action.  Very rarely in life does one have
>all the facts, but rather relies on indicators to help point the correct
>way.  If we Mr. Wish's approach, we cannot criticize anyone's actions
>we haven't walked in their shoes or don't have a written confession.  I'm
>sorry, but intelligent people can draw strong conclusions based on
>overwhelming evidence!  You are right on the money Lynn!
>Lawrence Smith
FN:Dennis S. Wish