OT: Prediction: Nuclear War for 05.

[MonkeySlap Too]

If the Iranians do hit the Seabrook nuclear plant, or something similar, who doubts we will nuke Terahn, or at least Qom?

__________________________________________________ ___________



Intelligence Agencies in many countries are arresting Iranian surveillance teams gathering information for al Qaeda. The teams have been discovered hanging about outside Israel’s diplomatic missions in the United States, South America, West Europe and the Middle East. Team members rounded up by the American FBI and Egyptian intelligence in the last ten days admitted under interrogation that they were collecting information for Iranian intelligence. Iran typically passes that information to al Qaeda for use in the terrorist attacks Tehran orders.

Egyptian security services arrested a group of Egyptian Islamic fundamentalists carrying out surveillance of the Israeli embassy in Cairo and monitoring the movements of Israeli diplomats and their families in the city. They told their interrogators they were working for Iran. The FBI nabbed teams watching Israeli consulates in Los Angeles, Atlanta and Houston. They were made up of Iranian Americans, Arab and Pakistani students - some of them US citizens, and all activists belonging to Muslim fundamentalist groups. They were perfectly aware that the data sent to Iranian intelligence was intended for use in hostage taking and bombing attacks against Israeli missions. Al Qaeda cells were also picked up in Brussels, Amsterdam, Madrid and the Uruguayan capital of Montevideo. Hizballah surveillance teams were rounded up in parts of West Europe.

US intelligence sources have learned that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in person has created a new clandestine umbrella organization for bringing together as an arm of his bureau all the al Qaeda-linked groups and likeminded movements. Osama bin Laden’s organization is believed to be plotting a major attack in the United States. The Islamic Republic is in the habit of using proxies for its terror campaigns, like the Lebanese Hizballah against Israeli targets. The US interrogation of the Iranian surveillance teams and sightings of other watchers has led to the conclusion that Tehran was plotting simultaneous terrorist strikes across America and other parts of the world, blowing up Israeli missions and Jewish centers and taking hostages in several places at once. Hopefully, those attacks will be averted by the capture of the Iranian agents.

[red5angel]

link please.

[Royal Dragon]

It will never happen. We can cause just as much dammage conventionally as we can wiht a nuke. In the grand sceme of things it all happenes in the same amount of time.

We can go into the Month of June with a fully running, and intact Iran, and come out of it with a crippled nation run by Us troops governing under martial law. This can happen if we use Nukes, or conventional troops. The difference is just about days, vs weeks, thats all.

No need to drop nukes, except to play with our toys. Plus a nuke will level alot of perfectly good buildings and infrastructure that must be comepletely rebuilt. In a war fought Conventionally, alot of stuff gets saved and can be used imediately, or with minimal repair time.

It's just more efficient to do it the old fashioned way.

The ONLY advantage would be to terrorise the world into not resisting our will.

[Shaolinlueb]

i doubt there would be any nuclear strikes form one nation to another. thats very last resort i think. but form say terrorist to a nation. probably most likely. like in sum of all fears or something.

[Royal Dragon]

It would probably be dirty Nukes though.

[ZIM]

I will also call for a link, please.

Other than that, the only remark I have is that Iran has never distanced itself from it's 1996 statement of intending to test any nukes it makes in Israel, preferably Tel Aviv.

Seabrook seems to have less to fear.

[MoreMisfortune]

badger badger badger badger badger badger badger badger badger badger

MUSHROOM MUSHROOM

[Mr Punch]

LOL @ Xebby! :D :D :D

Where does this crock come from? (The article, not 'badger'.)

[Nick Forrer]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Iran typically passes that information to al Qaeda for use in the terrorist attacks Tehran orders.


BS.

[red5angel]

It will never happen. We can cause just as much dammage conventionally as we can wiht a nuke. In the grand sceme of things it all happenes in the same amount of time.

uh, not quite. Physically you're talking about seconds to change the face of Iran for ever. And if you don't think it takes less time to change anything with a nuke, you go ahead and ask the older generation of Japanese for their opinion ;)


Still waiting for a link on this. If this were released by a credible source, chances are it woul dhave made the news. I haven't seen anything mentioned yet about this.

[MasterKiller]

MonkeySlap seems to be an extremely conservative fellow. I'm sure this came from a far-right news source, which is just about as credible as a far-left news source.

[Royal Dragon]

In the Grand sceme of things, a day, week, month or seconds it does not matter. In 30 days the same goal will be accomplished no matter what insterment of destruction we use.

In 500 years it won't matter *How* we did it, only that we did it.

NOT useing Nukes has the advantage of leaving alot of salvagable stuff,and lower loss of civillian lives.

[Merryprankster]

Iran typically passes that information to al Qaeda for use in the terrorist attacks Tehran orders.

Inflammatory garbage.

I want the source.

There is a wierd tendency on the part of many to lump all terrorists - especially Islamic ones - together, as though their goals and ideology are the same. They are not and consequently they are not all in cahoots.

[red5angel]

MP, obviously you didn't get the memo stating all terrorist are united against the US ;)

except for thos in BJJ, because their too busy terrorizing the kungfu world! :D

[David Jamieson]

Royal-

There is no doubt that the US military can inflict hella damage, but I wouldn't go so far as to say they "run" the country.

They command pockets, and only control where troops are. I think Iraq is a good example of that.

Remember, the "war" officially ended last year, and yet, it still looks pretty much like a war is still going on in that country.

Having said that, Nukes are a serious question and in a big way. The scary part is mostly the black market nukes that may exist because of the collapse of the soviet union and of course there is no question of rogue commanders, generals etc putting a little spending money commodities away for their personal purse.

Using nukes is reckless, and because someone is arab or muslim doesn't mean they are stupid.

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
[B]If the Iranians do hit the Seabrook nuclear plant, or something similar, who doubts we will nuke Terahn, or at least Qom?

__________________________________________________ ___________


Think of it slightly differently. If anyone has shown themselves to be an aggresive nation invading or holding people in a immoral occupation it's the United States and Israel. Both hold a very inhumane occupation over 2 different people in the middle east. The US attacked Iraq unprovoked based on false intellegence convinently provided by the chickenhawks. Their target is Irans nuclear power plant in Bushehr, which is VERY well fortified. You can look at the pictures on the internet. The only way to get to blow up the reactor, is through a low yeild 'mini-nuke'. The Chickenhawks are crazy and TOTALLY out of touch (Anyone remember Rumsfeld when he said we only need 25,000-50,000 troops to invade and occupy iraq?). If they feel that they can get away with it, they will attack Iran. Like the Vietnam war, that started with a false provocation known as the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident, if they want a war with Iran, they can make it look like Iran attacked and no one will be the wiser until it's too late.

[red5angel]

Both hold a very inhumane occupation over 2 different people in the middle east.

and I thought we had gotten away from this sort of retardarity for a while. I guess Newb had to live up to his name.

[Ray Pina]

I guess the question is:

1) Is Iran a friend of the U.S.?
2) Can it cause harm to the U.S. at home or abroad?
3) If so, can we do something about it?
4) What are we able/willing to do?

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
and I thought we had gotten away from this sort of retardarity for a while. I guess Newb had to live up to his name.


Would you like to live in the conditions of Iraq before, or after the war? How about Palestine or "The Occupied Territories"? Would you ever live there?


I present to you an article from Israels 3rd largest, and one of it's oldest papers, Ha'aretz:

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=121553&sw=Yassergrad


In Ha'aretz, it is confirmed that the IDF uses the policies of Nazi General Jurgen Stroop. Jurgen Stroop put down the Warsaw Ghetto resistance, and wrote his methods in his book. This book was then used in Nuremburg to hang him. The IDF has studied this book, and done the exact same tactics against the Palestanian people. I have read the Stroop Report from www.holocausthistory.com and have confirmed that the methods are in fact, the same.


Israeli Defense Forces Use Nazi Warsaw Ghetto Methods
http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/2002/020128idf_nazi.html






Please argue or make your point with substance, not name calling games please. That's like waving the biggest American flag (or *****) showing how much of a bigger patriot you are. It is counter productive and not helpful to the US.

[Reggie1]

Please argue or make your point with substance, not name calling games please. That's like waving the biggest American flag (or *****) showing how much of a bigger patriot you are. It is counter productive and not helpful to the US.

I love when people on a public BBS tell other people how they should respond. Nothing says socialism like uniformity of thought! ;)

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
uh, not quite. Physically you're talking about seconds to change the face of Iran for ever. And if you don't think it takes less time to change anything with a nuke, you go ahead and ask the older generation of Japanese for their opinion ;)





In the US wargames ran against Iran, the best scenario involved the entire navy fleet being sunk by Irans sunburst missles


http://judicial-inc.biz/Sunburn_Missile.htm

[David Jamieson]

Iran has made it clear on a few occasions that they are enemy of the USA.

Since the Shah was deposed it has been so.

However, Iran lacks the ways and means of launching any sort of attack on teh states nuclear or otherwise.

They do seem concerned with teh fact that the US and Israel hold the Nuke card in the middle east and it seems that they would like to shore up their shortcomings in this regard.

My opinion is this, less nukes = better living for the whole planet, but as long as the big boys continue their nuclear proliferation, I don't think they should be crying foul when the skinny kid starts lifting weights and practicing kungfu to protect himself against the big boys on the world playground.

If Iran starts any **** I am certain they realize they'll get theirs in spades and not just from the US. But I wouldn't deny them the ability to protect themselves against their enemies.

Simply put, with the state of things in the middle east, it is certainly in Irans best interest to become a nuclear power in todays world.

[Newb]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
Iran has made it clear on a few occasions that they are enemy of the USA.

Since the Shah was deposed it has been so.

However, Iran lacks the ways and means of launching any sort of attack on teh states nuclear or otherwise.

They do seem concerned with teh fact that the US and Israel hold the Nuke card in the middle east and it seems that they would like to shore up their shortcomings in this regard.

My opinion is this, less nukes = better living for the whole planet, but as long as the big boys continue their nuclear proliferation, I don't think they should be crying foul when the skinny kid starts lifting weights and practicing kungfu to protect himself against the big boys on the world playground.

If Iran starts any **** I am certain they realize they'll get theirs in spades and not just from the US. But I wouldn't deny them the ability to protect themselves against their enemies.

Simply put, with the state of things in the middle east, it is certainly in Irans best interest to become a nuclear power in todays world.

There is 1 point I would like to make. There is an old saying in Iran that goes "Behind every Mullahs (fundamentalists) beard, is a stamp that says "Made in England". I would highly recommend reading the book:
Hostage to Khomeini
http://www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/hostage.pdf

The Shahs wife stated that if u wish to know what happened in the Iranian Revolution, you have to read this book. The Iranian Revolution was sparked by British Intellegence who wanted to kick out the progressive Shah of Iran, and make Iran a backwards nation. This was part of the effort to recruit hardcore religious fighters to 'defend holy Islam' agaist 'evil soviet Russia'. This is all part of what became later 'Iran-Contra'. The Mullahs of Iran have hurt the people of Iran the most, and provided cheap oil to the western world with their backwards economics policies.

[red5angel]

Originally posted by Newb
In the US wargames ran against Iran, the best scenario involved the entire navy fleet being sunk by Irans sunburst missles


http://judicial-inc.biz/Sunburn_Missile.htm

I hope to god this sort of site isn't your normal source of information.

"Iran will see this as an attack by America and will threaten to retaliate. Israel will launch a Sunburn 22 taking out a carrier and Iran will get blamed."

According to this particular website it's not Iran tat uses them but Israel that uses them, ON Americans, to make it LOOK like Iran did it!
And when exactly did Iran get nuclear weapons?

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
I hope to god this sort of site isn't your normal source of information.

"Iran will see this as an attack by America and will threaten to retaliate. Israel will launch a Sunburn 22 taking out a carrier and Iran will get blamed."

According to this particular website it's not Iran tat uses them but Israel that uses them, ON Americans, to make it LOOK like Iran did it!
And when exactly did Iran get nuclear weapons?

LoL, I fully agree with you when you say 'you hope to God this site isn't part of my regular info'. Some poor confused guy who'se VERY scared of Jewish people by the name of "The_Skunk" posted it on libertyforum.org.


Anyways, I should have clarified. The only relevence I wanted to give you from that site was the evaluation of Irans missles and jets. Those match pretty much the public CIA files.

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by Reggie1
Nothing says socialism like uniformity of thought!

Are you serious? Socialism isn't about controlling thought any more than capatalisim is about providing basic human services. Ever heard of the Conflict-Elitist theory? The people who want to control the opinions of the masses are those who stand to gain the most by dupeing stupid poor people into voting against laws and measures designed to benifit them. Look at "Welfare Reform", look at so called "Tax Relief", look at anti-gay legislation.

And the poor Christian in the trailer keeps voting for Bush because, "God don't want us to kill our kin." Talk about thought police.

[WinterPalm]

Royal Dragon, you are in fantasy land my friend. The American's can not run even a decimated, militarily, country like Iraq. Never mind Iran. And where are the troops going to come from? Grenada? Peurto Rico? Where? Donald Rumsfeld already destroyed any time of public relations for the American Elite towards conscription.
People have to face the facts, America cannot fight wars alone and the help of the nation of Ulithi, all three or four atolls, will not make up, despite the prestige, of lack of military resources.

[Newb]

Originally posted by WinterPalm
Royal Dragon, you are in fantasy land my friend. The American's can not run even a decimated, militarily, country like Iraq. Never mind Iran. And where are the troops going to come from? Grenada? Peurto Rico? Where? Donald Rumsfeld already destroyed any time of public relations for the American Elite towards conscription.
People have to face the facts, America cannot fight wars alone and the help of the nation of Ulithi, all three or four atolls, will not make up, despite the prestige, of lack of military resources.


That will not stop the 'mini nuke' chickenhawks.

[red5angel]

And where are the troops going to come from?

Ah WinterPalm - our military, with reserves is 500,000 strong. What would you need troops for if it's glowing? You'd be surprised how subservient a people becomes after a shot like that. Religious Zealots? Fanatics? Where were the Japanese after Horoshima and Nagasaki?

[Reggie1]

Are you serious?

Notice the winky face?




Socialism isn't about controlling thought any more than capatalisim is about providing basic human services. Ever heard of the Conflict-Elitist theory? The people who want to control the opinions of the masses are those who stand to gain the most by dupeing stupid poor people into voting against laws and measures designed to benifit them. Look at "Welfare Reform", look at so called "Tax Relief", look at anti-gay legislation.

You think too much. And take yourself too seriously. I was mostly messing around.

[red5angel]

I'm all for socialization of the government and medical bodies.

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by Reggie1
You think too much. And take yourself too seriously. I was mostly messing around.

Oh, you're probably right. It's just that so many people have been disserviced by cold war propaganda that alot of Americans really do still believe that Socialisim=Communisim=Evil. It's sad that the people who would benifit most from Social reform are the ones who believe the Capatalist engineered rhetoric.

[Reggie1]

Oh, you're probably right. It's just that so many people have been disserviced by cold war propaganda that alot of Americans really do still believe that Socialisim=Communisim=Evil. It's sad that the people who would benifit most from Social reform are the ones who believe the Capatalist engineered rhetoric.

:D That I can completely understand. I was using it as more of the misunderstood pop term rather than the actual political definition. I probably should have just said 'fascism' isntead, but peopel get a little senstive about that.

[red5angel]

It's just that so many people have been disserviced by cold war propaganda that alot of Americans really do still believe that Socialisim=Communisim=Evil

can you back this statement up?

[FuXnDajenariht]

were you alive during the 80's or what?

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by red5angel
can you back this statement up?

Sure:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/12/column.novak.opinion.urban/

http://tcp.dramatools.net/archives/000249.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1283008/posts

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1911.htm

http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=19851130&s=singer

http://www.angelfire.com/fl4/trteam/revolution.html

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9701/13/bulgaria/

http://www.asininity.com/comments/329_0_1_0_C/

http://www.freerepublic.com/~liberalsareevilsocia/

http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=11495

These are all current articles, many from CNN. Socialists are accused of responsibility for the "collapse" of morality in America, anti-Semitic rhetoric, supporting Al-Qaeda and Saddam Huessein, dismantling the economy, destroying foreign relations in Europe, and on and on. None of these alegations contain a shred of truth, nor an understanding of Socialist ideology.

Some of the most successful contries in the world have a socialist democracy largely modeled on the form of government we enjoy in the U.S. The only difference is that they see to the health and basic needs of thier citizens, rather than the selfish desires of the corporate conglomerates. Thier citizens often enjoy a higher quality of life than ours. Crime rates are astronomically lower, poverty rates are almost non-existent, life expectancy in Sweden, for example is fifteen years longer than in the U.S., mostly due to thier healthcare and welfare programs.

[WinterPalm]

500,000. How many in Iraq? How many in Korea? How many in Afghanistan?
How about troop morale?
The only thing the US has, is the ability to blow something up. THere is no public relations worth the conqured people's time, and there is nothing they can do but continue to commit human rights violations.

[MoreMisfortune]

hey Jack, i have observed that behaviour against socialism on the americans as well.
It happens in here too, but i suppose less than in usa (btw are there even a Comunist and a Socialist party in usa?).

Oh my family is right wingers capitalist anti-commie :D
So it was hilarious to me when i was... 18 i think this one time they were talking politics and i said "I am a commie" lolfl it took them 20 secs to recover :D

[MoreMisfortune]

My doctor says I need to stop eating babies cos its making me fat

[Royal Dragon]

You should try premies, they are lower in calories.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
Are you serious? Socialism isn't about controlling thought any more than capatalisim is about providing basic human services.

I can be serious about it if you want. The essential socialist mechanic of planned markets doesn't vanish from the ideology when it comes to the marketplace of ideas.

And on the other hand, capitalism is precisely about providing basic human services. It differs from socialism in the mechanisms it advocates to provide them, not in denying their provision.

[Samurai Jack]

Please feel free to expand on your argument that planned markets have anything at all to do with controlling people's thoughts, or even that a planned market economy is an "essential" socialist component. I'm quite eager to hear your opinion.

Also, if you have the time, would you please site an historical or contemporary example of a governmental system whose sole purpose is/was to aquire, withhold, and secure wealth for an social elite that has used that system successfully to provide for the basic human needs of all of it's country's citizens?

[Christopher M]

The issue of 'thoughts' intersects with the political infrastructure in a number of places: education, media, art, and culture.

As with any other topic, the problem put to politics is how to identify and distribute the pertinent resources given their supply, their demand, and the recognition that they are limited.

As with any such system of interactions, the two fundamental approaches to this distribution are the free vesus planned models. The free model facilitates the movement of these resources, whereas the planned model identifies a logic for and carries out the movement of these resources manually.

In politics, the planned approach is called socialism and the free approach is called capitalism.

A planned system is precisely a controlled system. The "plan" refers to the logic and the "control" refers to the method. You exercise a plan for any given system by controlling various aspects of it.


would you please site an historical or contemporary example of a governmental system whose sole purpose is/was to aquire, withhold, and secure wealth for an social elite that has used that system successfully to provide for the basic human needs of all of it's country's citizens?

What does this have to do with anything I have said?

[Samurai Jack]

Originally posted by Christopher M
And on the other hand, capitalism is precisely about providing basic human services.

I disagree with this comment. I ask you to provide an example supporting this sentence as a debate technique, because I know that you cannot provide an example supporting your statement. This is not because of any short fall on your part, but because an example does not exist. Capatalisim is solely concerned with aquiring and maintaining wealth, therefore it inadequately provides for the basic needs of the people who must occupy the lower classes of a society.

[Christopher M]

It sounds like you are operating under the confound of using the Marxist definition of "capitalism" beyond its appropriate context. When capitalists and others use the term, they're referring to something entirely different than what Marx is, and if you confuse these two meanings your thinking is obviously fallacious for that reason.

Moreover, even if you are using Marxist definitions, your juxtaposition still isn't accurate: under these definitions, both socialism and capitalism are systems whose sole purpose is to aquire, withhold, and secure power for a social elite. They vary by who that elite is: the proletariat or the bourgeois respectively.

When capitalists and others use the term "capitalism" they are referring to political models based upon the free market and its relatives as discussed in classical liberal philosophy.

[Samurai Jack]

Now, to address your assertion that socialisim's key ideology is the "essential socialist mechanic of planned markets". To clarify, in the early days of the social democracy movement, specifically in Germany, the German Social Democrats were basing thier ideas on Marx's belief that only a working class revolution would accomplish any lasting or meaningful social changes. But once the GSD began to have successes in the electorate they abandoned this belief and began to espouse the idea that reforms within the system could be used to secure concrete benifits for the working class, and eventually perhaps even change the face of a nation's government given enough time.

They abandoned the plan to nationalize industry and instead have typically used welfare programs to improve living conditions for the countries citizens. Such programs include state funded unemployment and medical insurance, generous pensions, and subsidized food and housing.

The downside is that a socialist democracy can be very expensive to run. To pay for the programs the government levies high taxes, Denmark and Sweden pay for thier services with about a third of thier gross domestic product, for example. Not surprisingly, this is one of the main obstacles to the adaptation of a socialist democratic form of government. The wealthy and powerful corporate entities generally bear the brunt of the tax burden. Is it any wonder that a capatalist run society might feel threatened by socialist reform?

[Christopher M]

What relation does any of this have to anything I have said?

[Samurai Jack]

Oops, looks like I posted my retort while you were busy composing another argument.

"The essential socialist mechanic of planned markets doesn't vanish from the ideology when it comes to the marketplace of ideas."

I'm responding to your argument that because Marx espoused nationalizing industry and strictly controlling the economy, that this is still part of Socialist Democratic doctrine (at least that's what the above quote seems to be saying to me). My last post is an attempt to correct that mistaken belief. All of the
European Socialist governments have abandoned that original doctrine in favor of welfare reform. Currently the only socialist European country that attempts to control industry through some direct ownership is Sweden. However, the state run industry only accounts for 10% of total economic output.

It seems that you are trying to discuss theory, wheras I am more interested in testing the validity of social democracy as opposed to our own federal republic, by comparing the two. I'm looking at statistics and facts in order to evaluate success or failure, and being a biased social activist, my definition of "success" is finding the answer to the question, "Which system allows it's citizens to enjoy a higher quality of life." In that regard, most of Europe beats us hands down. Dosen't that seem a shame considering the greater wealth possessed by the U.S.?

[lkfmdc]

I know it's silly to expect a thread like this to stay on topic, but where in heck did that "report" come from... to me it looks like total BS.....

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
Oops, looks like I posted my retort while you were busy composing another argument.

:confused: I haven't done anything but reply to your posts.


I'm responding to your argument that because Marx espoused nationalizing industry and strictly controlling the economy, that this is still part of Socialist Democratic doctrine.

I never made any such argument.


It seems that you are trying to discuss theory, wheras I am more interested in testing the validity of social democracy as opposed to <American> federal republic

A comparison of American and European economies might be what you meant to offer, but what you actually offered was the claim that socialism was not about controlling thoughts and capitalism was not about providing basic human services. Of course, I can only respond to what you offer and not what you merely mean to offer.

[Samurai Jack]

Oh, well thanks for taking the time to write to me in spite of the vexing communication barrier. Many people get frustrated at this point but I'm glad we're avoiding this. I thought I was making very clear arguments supporting my position.

Would you mind explaining your postion without reference to mine, so that we can meaningfully compare ideas? At least we'll understand eachother, and we can expand our dialog from there.

[Christopher M]

Which position?

[Samurai Jack]

You tell me. Here, I'll help. You said:

I can be serious about it if you want. The essential socialist mechanic of planned markets doesn't vanish from the ideology when it comes to the marketplace of ideas.

I think I've demonstrated that it has, indeed, been discarded from the ideology, by being practically replaced by welfare doctrines. Socialisim isn't just an abstract philosphy, it's being practically applied today. This is the socialisim I'm interested in.

And on the other hand, capitalism is precisely about providing basic human services. It differs from socialism in the mechanisms it advocates to provide them, not in denying their provision.

Nowhere is capitalisim interested in the well being of the working class, except as a commodity to be exploited. This exploitation is almost never in the best interests of the individual worker, who is used to produce a good which the capatalist desires, then discarded when no longer useful. There are many examples of this.

What mechanisims do you believe captalism has in place to provide effective human services?

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Samurai Jack
I think I've demonstrated that it has, indeed, been discarded from the ideology, by being practically replaced by welfare doctrines.

No, firstly there are still plenty of nationalist implementations, and secondly nationalism is not the only variety of planned market. The redistributive models you turn to are no less representative of planned markets simply because they are not nationalist.


Nowhere is capitalisim interested in the well being of the working class, except as a commodity to be exploited.

Here we have your error of confounding the Marxist and general definitions of capitalism. Marx defines capitalism as the dictatorship of the bourgeois -- where society is composed of two classes defined by their ownership of (bourgeois) or bounds to (proletariat) the means of production. Capitalists and others define capitalism as those socioeconomic models based on classical liberal philosophy. These are two entirely different things.

You're using the Marxist definition, but then holding the capitalists accountable as if they endorse it. This is, of course, not reasonable. A valid critique of capitalism has to be based on the principles of that ideology, not of some other.

[MoreMisfortune]

You lose capitalist pig, shut up and get out

[red5angel]

samurai jack, I read the first three articles you posted, none of them pointed to your claim that "that alot of Americans really do still believe that Socialisim=Communisim=Evil." I didn't bother reading the rest because I figure the first three articles are representative of the material in those as well.
Saying "most americans feel..." is pretty much your opinion on this matter. In my own experience, most of the americans I kno, either don't know a whole lot about socialism, and so don't have a whole lot to say about it, or seem to like the ideas of socialism. Of course I've met a few that don't, whether they understand ti or not, but that's hardly "most".


and there is nothing they can do but continue to commit human rights violations.

you've been kicked out of the sanbox winterpalm. Take your idiocy somewhere else please.


btw are there even a Comunist and a Socialist party in usa?

yes. Xebs, exactly how much time have you spent in america tha you can claim anything about "most americans"?



I know it's silly to expect a thread like this to stay on topic, but where in heck did that "report" come from... to me it looks like total BS.....

It is Ross. MS2 has failed to provide a link, and there appears to be no supporting evidence in the news anywhere - I'd figure this to be news worthy.

[MoreMisfortune]

red, i base me-self from the media (theres a lot of usa media) and the internet basicly

do those parties have candidates for mayor, governor, president?

all i ever see is democrats and liberals
where are the others?
or are you saying "yes there are others but teh media dont show em"
teh media only shows what peeps wanna see

[MoreMisfortune]

you see, the problem is there is a whole lotta fat on the babies, so its hard to get a good light choice cut
i cant deny that its tender and tasty though

[Newb]

At the risk of sounding unpopular I'm going to say that Adam Smith Deregulated full Free Trade and Communism both do not work. They are simply the extremes on the same coin. If you deregulate everything, then there is no point in having a government really. By deregulating EVERYTHING, you make it easy, as in the case of Enron and California, for powerful cartels to band together to loot the population. Some people say that won't work because if the power companies band together like they did in California, and proceed to loot the population blind, the population will look for other sources of power. This is a fantasy, as you need electricity to be able to produce power plants. Our population doesn't have the technical know how on how to make a new power plant anyways, they are *Dependant*. Same goes with health care. Look at the quality of health care and the number of hospitals and beds, along with the skilled staff required to maintain them:

Pennsylvania Counties At or Above the Hill-Burton Standards for Number of Hospital Beds Per Capita, 1980-2002
http://www.larouchepac.com/images/graficas/pahospitals.gif


The argument of the Adam Smith Free Trade college student and neo-con or liberal, is that Govt. is always going to be corrupt and bad. They fail to realize that a Government like ours has a constitution that demands the people who run the government "Provide for the General Welfare of the population and promote the posterity of the Nation". A corporation does NOT have this constitution. A corporation simply has 1 goal, to make as much money as possible. Greedy people behind corporations will do anything, even if their actions kill people like Ken Lays Enron did, to make as much money as possible.


Therefore the argument of the Free Trade Adam Smith "invisible hand" lover is fully null and stupid. Governments aren't corrupt. Private businesses aren't corrupt. People in Government and Private businesses are corrupt. At least a government has a constitution that puts the power to check and balance the people in the Government by elections and so fourth. It depends then on the people, if they people aren't brainwashed or apathetic, they will uphold the Government to what it needs to be. You do not have that authority over a private business.

In conclusion, The American System of Political Economy has proven to work repeatedly, while communism and adam smith free trade have failed repeatedly. You must regulate essential commodities that people need to live such as electricity, you must regulate the essential needs of the population to promote the general welfare such as providing for health care and education; and the rest you can put in a free trade environment.

Full blown communism simply suffers the same problem, doesn't work in the real life because of human greed.

[Royal Dragon]

That's why I said you should try premmies. They are just as delctible as the new borns, but half the fat.

[ZIM]

Originally posted by Newb
At the risk of sounding unpopular I'm going to say that Adam Smith Deregulated full Free Trade and Communism both do not work. They are simply the extremes on the same coin. If you deregulate everything, then there is no point in having a government really. By deregulating EVERYTHING, you make it easy, as in the case of Enron and California, for powerful cartels to band together to loot the population. Some people say that won't work because if the power companies band together like they did in California, and proceed to loot the population blind, the population will look for other sources of power. This is a fantasy, as you need electricity to be able to produce power plants. Our population doesn't have the technical know how on how to make a new power plant anyways, they are *Dependant*. Same goes with health care. Look at the quality of health care and the number of hospitals and beds, along with the skilled staff required to maintain them:

Pennsylvania Counties At or Above the Hill-Burton Standards for Number of Hospital Beds Per Capita, 1980-2002
http://www.larouchepac.com/images/graficas/pahospitals.gif


The argument of the Adam Smith Free Trade college student and neo-con or liberal, is that Govt. is always going to be corrupt and bad. They fail to realize that a Government like ours has a constitution that demands the people who run the government "Provide for the General Welfare of the population and promote the posterity of the Nation". A corporation does NOT have this constitution. A corporation simply has 1 goal, to make as much money as possible. Greedy people behind corporations will do anything, even if their actions kill people like Ken Lays Enron did, to make as much money as possible.


Therefore the argument of the Free Trade Adam Smith "invisible hand" lover is fully null and stupid. Governments aren't corrupt. Private businesses aren't corrupt. People in Government and Private businesses are corrupt. At least a government has a constitution that puts the power to check and balance the people in the Government by elections and so fourth. It depends then on the people, if they people aren't brainwashed or apathetic, they will uphold the Government to what it needs to be. You do not have that authority over a private business.

In conclusion, The American System of Political Economy has proven to work repeatedly, while communism and adam smith free trade have failed repeatedly. You must regulate essential commodities that people need to live such as electricity, you must regulate the essential needs of the population to promote the general welfare such as providing for health care and education; and the rest you can put in a free trade environment.

Full blown communism simply suffers the same problem, doesn't work in the real life because of human greed. Straw man? Appeal to authority? Or fringeworthy isolationist paranoid?

[Newb]

Good Sir, the great thing about actually writing a developed post regarding your point like I have done is that you can actually have a discussion with me. I give you the background information, which I could elaborate on if u wanted to challenge, or had questions on.


You on the other hand have not provided any argument, and can be summed up to a childish temper tantrum. It has provided absolutely no basis for any kind of discussion, except an ape like reaction to throw poopoo at each other.

[ZIM]

Not "poo poo" if it is, in fact, true.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Newb
By deregulating EVERYTHING, you make it easy, as in the case of Enron and California, for powerful cartels to band together to loot the population.

Classical liberals are generally minarchists, not anarchists. The difference is fundamental, because the sort of argument you offer here only attacks the anarchist position. The anarchist classical liberal says 'get rid of all state structures,' to which you could reply that that would facilitate monopolies which would violate free market principles and thus defeat the strength of the classical liberal position in the first place.

On the other hand, the minarchist classical liberal says 'I endorse the free market.' This is a prima facie endorsement of any X where X increases the freedom of the market. If you suggest that getting rid of Y would violate free market principles, it's then specious to conclude that the minarchist classical liberal would want to get rid of Y. Your argument that this position would result in monopoly is then invalid.


adam smith free trade have failed repeatedly.

It hasn't ever even been tried. One important difference between the classical liberals and the classical socialists is that the former advocated a gradual development of society and the latter advocated revolution to create sudden change. One effect this has had is that we've got to observe a number of socialist experiments but we're still on our way towards (or away from) classical liberalism. The best examples I can think of off-hand are the new economies of New Zealand and Ireland, which have been very successful so far, but are still too young to really tell. And even they are far from the ideal.

[Newb]

Originally posted by ZIM
Not "poo poo" if it is, in fact, true.

I will have to repeat what I said earlier:

You on the other hand have not provided any argument, and can be summed up to a childish temper tantrum. It has provided absolutely no basis for any kind of discussion.



You are right that it is not poo poo if it is true, but you have failed to give any kind of supporting argument to prove that it is true. So far, it is just poo poo throwing.

[red5angel]

Originally posted by MoreMisfortune
red, i base me-self from the media (theres a lot of usa media) and the internet basicly

do those parties have candidates for mayor, governor, president?

all i ever see is democrats and liberals
where are the others?
or are you saying "yes there are others but teh media dont show em"
teh media only shows what peeps wanna see

naughty naughty using the media and the internet to form your bases of judgement on a people. If I did that I would have started a war with canada by now! ;)

There are several other parties in our system but the joke - half joke - is that we are a two party system. Usually only the green party get's any real mention by the media. Most other parties aren't even glossed over.


You on the other hand have not provided any argument, and can be summed up to a childish temper tantrum. It has provided absolutely no basis for any kind of discussion, except an ape like reaction to throw poopoo at each other.

Newb, I'm going to make a quick suggestion here, slightly ironic coming from me - but you need to watch how you react to others posts. This is the second time I've seen you claim someone was reacting in a childish or immature fashion. Sometimes things are said to draw one into a discussion, and you need to have a little more patience and not jump to the conclusion tha someone is making an irrational and totally emotional response to your posts. Better not to reply in a childish and emotional way to posts you think are that as well.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel


Newb, I'm going to make a quick suggestion here, slightly ironic coming from me - but you need to watch how you react to others posts. This is the second time I've seen you claim someone was reacting in a childish or immature fashion. Sometimes things are said to draw one into a discussion, and you need to have a little more patience and not jump to the conclusion tha someone is making an irrational and totally emotional response to your posts. Better not to reply in a childish and emotional way to posts you think are that as well. [/B]


I'm sorry sir, but looking at the evidence it's clear that I'm in the right in this example, and here's why. If you look at my post which regarded the problems with Communism and Adam Smith "Invisible Hand" free Trade. I also give a solution of the American System of Physical Economy and how that benefits us. After my lengthy post, Zim quoted me and posted a silly insulting 1 word sentances. Which I quote:


Straw man? Appeal to authority? Or fringeworthy isolationist paranoid?

Give me a break here. He obviously didn't even read it or understand it, didn't ask any questions or make any comment on it, made no attempt to have any kind of dialogue. I stand by my statement, and believe have reasonably defended it so. Perhaps I am guilty of what you are stating in other threads, but not in this one.

[MonkeySlap Too]

MK said:
"MonkeySlap seems to be an extremely conservative fellow. I'm sure this came from a far-right news source, which is just about as credible as a far-left news source."

Hah! I got it from a far-left site... now I'm looking for the URL, I've been real busy, so haven't had the chance to see what damage my flame-ball has wrought... Maybe this weekend.

I think my appearing 'conservative' is only made possible by the complete and utter stupidity exhibited by our 'left.' I'd wager my views are all over the map.
Somewhere on the web there is a political analizer test. I think I came out as somewhat "libertarian." I beleive in individual responsibility and free markets, but I don't beleive in completely free markets or giving illegal aliens free college educations when our own citizens can't get that benefit. I DO however encourage both Unions (hey, if a markets mostly free, why not group bargaining to wield better control over your life?) and guest-worker passes.

Left? Right? Or just practical minded with a streak of self-respect? Who knows...

[MasterKiller]

I was just basing that off of your love of all things Reagan and your seemingly stolid support for the current administration.

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
[B]MK said:

Somewhere on the web there is a political analizer test. I think I came out as somewhat "libertarian." I beleive in individual responsibility and free markets, but I don't beleive in completely free markets [snip]

Both modern Liberals and Conservatives (Neo-Cons) believe in the Free Market. It gives the oligarchs more freedom to loot you.

[Samurai Jack]

Red, if you had bothered to read the articles, you would have found that they came from several important news sources, including CNN, Fox News, and the Associated Press. I'm willing to bet that since these three are the largest news sources in the country, that they are providing the information that the majority uses to formulate thier opinion, and are therefore indicative of that opinion.

I lack the resources to provide more compelling information in this regard, statisics/ opinion polls for example, so I'll concede that perhaps you are right. Perhaps Socialisim is mainstream in America, and the recent political activity that points to the contrary is a mere fluk. I admit it would be nice if that was the case.

[MonkeySlap Too]

MK - I DO support the current adminstration, but not blindly and not in all things. Kerry/Edwards was a disaster waiting to happen. In fact ALL recent Democratic admins have been complete disasters in regards to foreign policy. But at the moment I am short on time.

But on the other hand, I just inked the deal to write an incredibally pro-U.N. comic book. Where, instead of showing the sleaze and corruption of the current one, I hope to show what it could be.

GWB is not the demon people think he is. Neither is Bill Clinton.

We are at a tough time in history, and I just don't think the American left has a clue. I'm hoping the right gets around to getting one, but at least I'm pretty sure they won't surrender in the process of it. Whereas history shows from FDR onward (with the exception of JFK who Reagan borrowed from heavily) that the Dems will let thier ideoplogy blind them and they will give away our security. (FDR and Truman are directly responsible for the success of Soviet nuclear espionage, and the selling out of Eastern Europe to "Uncle Joe" - a funny fact is that FDR's first VP was a Soviet Spy! If he hadn't died in office and Truman took over... MMM- makes me wonder how he died since our Army Intelligence knew what he was...

This is not right-wing fantasy... these are things you can research and draw your own conclusions.

I look at the generation of 'liberals' we have, and they scare the sh!t out of me. But so does the religous right... so I understand peoples trepidation with the repubs... but the dems have just gotten so shrill, and lie so much... I've just lost any ability to take them seriously... the silly ones on the repub side just seem silly, not scary...

[ZIM]

Originally posted by Newb

Give me a break here. He obviously didn't even read it or understand it, didn't ask any questions or make any comment on it, made no attempt to have any kind of dialogue. I stand by my statement, and believe have reasonably defended it so. Perhaps I am guilty of what you are stating in other threads, but not in this one. You got 1 out of 4.

Try this: I'm not talking to *you*.

[Newb]

Originally posted by ZIM
You got 1 out of 4.

Try this: I'm not talking to *you*.

That's also not true, because if you we're not 'talking to me' you simply wouldn't have responded at all. Furthermore, you have no basis 'not to talk to me anymore'. Any insults that were thrown around were thrown around by you, I didn't insult you for you to 'take your ball home and go home'. However, if you cannot handle a discussion and dialogue, then ignoring politics and not having strong opinions aren't the worst decisions you can make. It was fun talking to you while it lasted! I'm sorry you couldn't keep up.

[ZIM]

Nobody has insulted you here on this thread, actually. I refer instead to your source and style of argument, which was logical fallacy.

Not an insult if true.

But you're a Larouchie. Certainly you're used to this kind of reception.

[Newb]

Originally posted by ZIM
Nobody has insulted you here on this thread, actually. I refer instead to your source and style of argument, which was logical fallacy.

Not an insult if true.

But you're a Larouchie. Certainly you're used to this kind of reception.


You claim such things, but nothing in any of your posts shows that you did. All you did was literally post 4 silly and insulting 1 word sentances, then when called out said 'i'm not talking to you anymore'. If you have a problem with my posts, go ahead and refer to them. There's more than enough information for you to argue or debate about, so please go ahead. Give us context, instead of simple non defined declarative sentances. Even George Bushes sentances have more than 1 word in them, even tho they don't say anything extra, at least the poor fool tries.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Here's one of the links that started the thread: http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=953

The blog I pulled the quote from is not suitable for linking here - pretty much fringe lefty stuff, but lots of non-family friendly content.

I don't know who these guys are, but sure look 'official' - but anyone can these days :)

Now back to work...

[ZIM]

Originally posted by Newb
etc... Tell you what. Let me just ask you one question that actually is of interest to me, kthx.

Q: Lyndon Larouche is what, 82 or 83 years old now. He's on borrowed time from his Biblical 'threescore and ten'. What happens when he dies?

Seriously. Do you know?

[MonkeySlap Too]

Does anyone actually take Lyndon Larouche seriuosly?

[ZIM]

Newb does.

[ZIM]

Not a neutral source, admittedly, but amusing/interesting:

Has the US threatened to nuke Mecca? (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42272)
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Why hasn't Osama bin Laden's terror network executed an attack on U.S. soil since 9-11?

Simple, says Dr. Jack Wheeler, creator of an acclaimed intelligence website dubbed "the oasis for rational conservatives": The U.S. has threatened to nuke the Muslim holy city of Mecca should the terror leader strike America again.

On his website, To the Point, Wheeler explains how the Bush administration has identified the potential of wiping Mecca off the map as bin Laden's ultimate point of vulnerability – the Damoclean Sword hanging over his head.

"Israel … recognizes that the Aswan Dam is Egypt's Damoclean Sword," writes Wheeler. "There is no possibility whatever of Egypt's winning a war with Israel, for if Aswan is blown, all of inhabited Egypt is under 20 feet of water. Once the Israelis made this clear to the Egyptians, the possibility of any future Egyptian attack on Israel like that of 1948, 1967, and 1972 is gone."

Wheeler says talk of bin Laden's Damoclean Sword has infiltrated the Beltway.

Writes Wheeler in his members-only column: "There has been a rumor floating in the Washington ether for some time now that George Bush has figured out what Sword of Damocles is suspended over Osama bin Laden's head.
There's more, but that's sufficient for the idea.

[MoreMisfortune]

yo son id say cos the defences are focused now
defenses over-sensitive even maybe

they need to wait for a moment of weakness, open-ness, distraction - to be able to strike again
and now is not exaclty teh moment
this requires a lot of planning and the strategical use of the surprise advantage

faint left, hit right

or the cool sentance:
"Uproar east, strike west"

[MoreMisfortune]

oh
to add

if the usa really did bomb meca then oh boy oh yeah you guys would see muslim going after your ass
that would seriously seriously pizz em off
not only the fundamentalist dude, all of em muslims would look for means to bust yo ass

[ZIM]

Originally posted by MoreMisfortune
oh
to add

if the usa really did bomb meca then oh boy oh yeah you guys would see muslim going after your ass
that would seriously seriously pizz em off
not only the fundamentalist dude, all of em muslims would look for means to bust yo ass Heh.
The world hasn't seen the US well & truly ****ed off.

Come & get some. :D

[lkfmdc]

bombing Mecca would be the worst decision ever in US history, but, sadly, I could see Bush doing it!!!

as fer pizzed Americans, well, there was that joke about the Japanese calling up Osama and saying "dude, didn't you ever read history?"....

[Vash]

"They drop two bomb. TWO!"

[MoreMisfortune]

lol Vash :D

you americans arent the only with da bomb actually, but anyways

DUCK AND COVER!! :D

John was like "Woooohooo partyyyy!" at his cousins (he makes sex with his cousin girl) -> \o/
Then he seen an atom bomb coming so he...

/o\ Ducked and covered! Today he is fine! :) And so is their kid! "Genetics are soooo overated" he says.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Seems unlikely... it's in Saudi Arabia...While I can appreciate the thought - Islam is a war-based religion that has lieiing to outsiders as a primary tenant of the faith. Once you just READ what THEY say, it's f@cking scary. All of the apologists you hear cannot support thier statements in scripture, whereas the terrorists can. Over 80% of wars are instigated by muslims. Hatred is taught in the mosques all over the world. If my ancestors hadn't fought them off at the gates of Vienna, we'd still be living in the stone age right now, as slaves to the mohemmedan..

However, the reality is that there are millions of Muslims who do not practice thier religion, and are perfectly good people. I prefer to change minds rather than extinguish them. However, when they come to kill me or subjugate me into dhimmitude, I will be happy to give them the chance to die for their god.

[Royal Dragon]

My Daughter is a gynmnst. It's the ONLY thing she really cares about. When she is doing wrong the "Threat" of taking her out will often correct her behavior.

However, one time I actually DID Ground her from the gym. Once gymnastics was gone she had no motivation to correct her behavior because .... well... gymnastics (her prime motivator) was gone. Her behavior went from bad, to worse. Then from worse to really bad.

Now, eventually we starightened her out, got her back in the gym, and the *Threat* of taking it away from her worked wonders once again, so loing as I didn'tactually do it.

In the case of bombing Mecca, I'm sure so long as we don't actually do it, the threat of doing so will more than accomplish our goal, but if we DO bomb it to oblivion, it will cause exactly the attacks we wish to avoid. It's a bluff too severe to call us on.

As for there not being major attacks since 2001, I'm not so sure little things haven't been going on. I think it's just not reported as being such. Anyone remember the backout?Did we ever get any real explanation of it's cause?

What about all sorts of little things going on in the US? Was the train in Chicago shut down due to a "Malfunction" last summer? or do the guys I know who associate with the search and rescue crowds claiming it was a dirty nuke know the covered up truth?

Or how about this therory, maybe there IS no Terrorist threat anymore. I mean look what happened lasttime, we took controll of Afganistan, then raided Iraq for Sh1ts and Giggles. Now there is talk of Iran, and possibly even Syria has been thrown out since almost day one. Maybe the "Terrorists know that any attack on US soil will result in an arab nation being leveled, and conqured not only by the us, but all our buddies as well.Thats why you hear stuff happeneing over seas, but not here.

Anyway, just some random thoughts to toss out. Comments anyone?

[HopGar]

We've gone back to this AGAIN?!!! Well, I guess I'm not posting because anything that I have to say is dismissed as "alarmist" (to quote Kung Lek and several other people who clearly are completely ignorant of the situation the article is talking referring to) as well as "insulting" and "hateful." So I guess the realist who knows what's flying has to shut up because a select few think that I should just not talk and can erase my posts at will.

I have an idea.......how about we not talk about these things.....they are plently inflammatory and just get people upset (seeing this thread along just ticks me off and makes me nauseous since I know alot of the facts and alot of people just don't want to hear it....I thought we had finally decided to not discuss this kind of stuff)...Isn't this a kung fu forum and not a place to discuss conspiracry theories which blame Israel and America for all the world's problems?

yeah that's all I'll say

[David Jamieson]

uh, pretty much every religion can easily be misconstrued as war based.

be it the religious holidays of the jews celebrating war victory, the templars of christianity, the sarasins and moorish raids of islam, the conflicts of the mahabarata, the khmers, etc etc.

Christianity certainly has it's share of "war" in it's history etc etc.
I use christianity because we supposedly live in Christian countries...at least if your in the westerm hemisphere you do and if you don't think so, well think again.

anyway, what is happening in the world is a fundamental change of the entire structure of humanity and how it functions. teh new world order is a struggle that has an aim of at first controlling the globe, then getting a handle on war, then getting a handle on people and resources and then moving towards harmony.

people are fundamentally resistant to this change and tehre is gonna be backlash from every single centre because they aren't the architects of teh overall plan.

What many people don't realize is that each and every nation has a hand in.

does the individual have say? Not really, but if a world of shared diversity, no war, no poverty, and better control over disease is the result in 1 or 2 hundred years, then I am all for it.

yes there will be people who will use the situation to fill their pockets and yes, some "conspiracies" are real in the push towards founding this new world order. But these are in teh human nature, as it is in our nature to survive.

If we can collectively get a handle on ourselves, that is on;y going to be a good thing.

people are far too resistant to change.

How many of you have children? how many of you regulate almost every aspect of their lives and watch over them to ensure that they will eventually be able to make the correct decisions in their lives?

How many of you have been greedy? Broken the laws of your land? done immoral things? what if this can all be ended through the path that is started at the beginning of the 20th century? Would you kick in a follow the plan or would you rather be outside this new evolution of society?

food for thought

[David Jamieson]

and hop gar, i fail to see how you are more enlightened than anyone else here.

we all don't really know jack outside what our media tells us.

even people in country only have a relatively small sphere of influence.

but thanks for the personal attack on me anyway spitwad. :p

[HopGar]

How about the fact that I don't rely on the AP and CNN for news? I tend to read Al-Jezeera and Israeli (re: Arutz Sheva and Jerusalem Post) news to find out what's going on. Oh, yeah, then there's that little bit that I'm an Israeli.......

[fa_jing]

true that people who have never actually been to Israel tend to not have an accurate feel for the situation on the ground.

[ZIM]

)...Isn't this a kung fu forum and not a place to discuss conspiracry theories which blame Israel and America for all the world's problems?
HopGar-

Speculation is OK, conspiracy, I agree, is not.

As for not blaming Israel or America, I also agree.

MST has the gist of it, IMHO.


anyway, what is happening in the world is a fundamental change of the entire structure of humanity and how it functions. teh new world order is a struggle that has an aim of at first controlling the globe, then getting a handle on war, then getting a handle on people and resources and then moving towards harmony. This is a bone-chilling sentence.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by ZIM
This is a bone-chilling sentence.

In both senses of the word? :D

[ZIM]

Originally posted by Christopher M
In both senses of the word? :D Hadn't thought of it that way. :p

[David Jamieson]

right so being an israeli makes you more knowing about everything? :rolleyes:

whatever dude.

your as in the dark as teh rest of us and I mean everyone here.

as much as we'd like to think we know something because we can read or listen or look, we don't actually know much more than what is presented to us.

at which point we make a choice of teh opinions and seek to develop our own. In the meantime, we are all basing our opinions not on real truths but on a combination of some facts and mostly opinions.

in fact, even facts are presented with quite a lot of emotional attachment these days.

who here really knows what if any plan there is?

apparently none of us. But I agree that talking Iraqi politics, Israeli politics etc etc is hardly appropriate in a kungfu forum. But people keep bringing it up and it keeps staying here.

If I was still modding here this **** would be deleted in the extreme short term. :p

[David Jamieson]

also, what exactly is the difference between conspiracy and speculation zim in context to any of these bull **** threads?

and hop gar, what's the difference between cnn and al jazeera?

same animal, different sides of the fence really.

[FuXnDajenariht]

need a blanky ZIM?

[FuXnDajenariht]

im thinking that would be perspective in both cases Kung Lek.

[HopGar]

A couple of points and then I'm going to attempt to ignore this thread unless someone posts something really inflammatory:

1) "be it the religious holidays of the jews celebrating war victory"
I've never heard of a jewish religious holiday celebrating victory in war. This coming from an Orthodox jew, that's just a mistake; I'll just guess that this is out of ignorance.

2) And yes, being that I am Israeli, I have a much better idea of the facts on the ground in that country than you do. Have you lived there? I will guess not. All one has to do is visit and suddenly it makes sense why the Israeli army and security establishments follow those procedures. Ghettos? Nazi treatment? I think not, although I do admit that there are those people like in any country that hate a group and make their lives miserable on purpose (in this case, it's usually because Israelis for the most part all know each other or are within 6 degrees of each other and it kinda makes them mad when their friends and family get killed or hurt.) In general, the media loves to generate stories based on wild fantasies like these.

3) Ok, I picked a bad example, especially since world media has this tendency to embrace the "underdog" and villify the "oppressor" (in this case, I hardly consider Israel an oppressor.)

4) Al J gives a pretty good picture of what is happening in the Arab world, even if it "moderate." CNN is mostly inflammatory crap when it comes to international news, presenting one side of the picture - usually what the journalist thinks and wants everyone else to buy into. CNN is a bit better in local news, but not by much.

I agree this thread should be erased.

That's all for now

peace

[David Jamieson]

everything is about perception and perspective.

my reality states that not one person here, including yours truly actually has a big picture idea of what's going on. Not one. It's all just a bunch of ****. This thread an all like it should be immediately deleted upon discovery by a mod or an admin.

I have no idea why they keep this stuff here, it doesn zip, zero nada for community and everyone is talking out their ass for the most part.

this joint needs some cleaning up and some refocusing on the goodness that is kungfu instead of listening to dumb ass pro bush diatribes or getting lost in a quagmire of poli-sci references or a bunch of posturing idiots who think they know something cause they live close to where an event took place.

ridiculous. But whatever, I'll play as long as teh sandbox is here I guess. It's not like there's much to do here other than this these days.

c'mon boys, get tough and get this drivel outta here!

[David Jamieson]

I've never heard of a jewish religious holiday celebrating victory in war.

I don't know if you're just stupid or a liar now.

what the hell do you think Chanuka is?
A little something about the victorious Macabees. Yeesh:rolleyes:

dude, just stfu already.

and for your personal reference oh orthodox jew:

Ha·nuk·kah or Ha·nu·kah also Cha·nu·kah ( P ) Pronunciation Key (än-k, hä-)
n. Judaism
An eight-day festival beginning on the 25th day of Kislev, commemorating the victory in 165 B.C. of the Maccabees over Antiochus Epiphanes (c. 215-164 B.C.) and the rededication of the Temple at Jerusalem. Also called Feast of Dedication, Feast of Lights.

[HopGar]

um, actually, that's hardly a religious holiday. More similar to israel independence day. Relgious holidays are those in the bible. Nice try, no cigar

[FuXnDajenariht]

i aint jewish or nuthin but actually i believe chanukah has more to do with the miracle god performed in the temple after the battle. you know the whole only enough candle oil for one day and it ending up somehow being enough for 6 more.

[HopGar]

well, that too :D ... I'm becoming forgetful just trying to respond to some of the inane statements on this thread. (hey mods, can ya erase this inflammatory crap alrady?)

[Merryprankster]

Good website for this stuff.

http://www.fmep.org/maps/

There's like...REAL information here. Not bull**** "oppressor" propaganda, or mindless Israeli rantings that "there's no such thing as a Palestinian."

I particularly like the Taba maps. So close....then Arafat shut it all down....

[David Jamieson]

um, actually, that's hardly a religious holiday. More similar to israel independence day. Relgious holidays are those in the bible. Nice try, no cigar

well it certainly isn't as important as Rosh Hashana or Yom Kippur which are th "high holy days" it is celebrated by jews in home and in synagogue...so...

lol. nice try yourself.

you are so full of **** on this one and you friggin know it.

You shoulda stfu when you were able to. but your stupid pride got the best of you.

dum dee dum, still waiting for this stupid ****ing thread to disappear ... dum dee doo, dee dum dum dum.

[FuXnDajenariht]

aww dont be a killjoy :p

no ones making ya post.

i always look at it this way. you can tell the ****heads with their fingers in their asses from the rest, with an actual functioning brainstem.

[ZIM]

also, what exactly is the difference between conspiracy and speculation zim Inexactly, I'd say the difference goes a little like:
speculation- What's the likelihood of x event?
conspiracy- Its them jooos/oligarchs/arabs/neocons that're behind x event.
Like so (http://www.vialls.com/subliminalsuggestion/tsunami.html)

[David Jamieson]

bwahahahahahaha.

New york is responsible?

those *******s! :p

zim, what i'm saying is there is a fine almost undecernable line between what people speculate here and what conspiracy theories are built upon.

yes, they are two different things...at least according to my dictionary, but it seems that conspiracy theory is often considered legitimate speculation and vice versa here and elsewhere on the net.

Trouble these days is there is so much spin thrown on everything that is filtered out to us in any media in any form that unless you are directly connected to any direct action, it is impossible to know the truth of anything beyond what a sports score is and which celebrity is breaking up with which other celebrity these days.

btw and fwiw, I watch Larry King on CNN and that's it. :p
I can't even watch Canadian news anymore it is so saturated with bias and opinion like everywhere else. I would say that Fox is the pinnacle of bias and opinionation though. Man, those guys go overboard!

[Merryprankster]

Speculation is something along the lines of:

"Gosh, we don't really exactly know what happened. Maybe it was this or this."

Conspiracy is:

"The Jews were behind 9/11"

"3,000 Jews who worked at the WTC were notified that the attacks were going to happen. The Jews must have done it."

"A missile hit the Pentagon."

"The U.S. went to war for halliburton."

"A Dingo ate my baby," etc.

I would also say that a defining characteristic of a conspiracy and the attendent theorist is "belief." As in, even though available evidence demonstrates that the theory and the theorist are full of malarky, they choose to believe it anyway.

[ZIM]

"A Dingo ate my baby," Now you're just speculating....:p

[David Jamieson]

Merry-

The 911 thing is still a huge flap all over the place and the problem is exactly the evidence. This in turn has fueled wilder and wilder conspiracy theories.

If everything and I mean Everything was put on the table, it would probably shut down a lot of the conspiracy theories.

despite the commision report, there is still a lot of unanswered questions about that day. At the very least we know that someone is not forthcoming.

I mean, I understand why the Bin Ladens were flown out of the States. Probably had a lot to do with not wanting a lynch mob wasting them. But the immediacy of it was weird and it's never been spoken to as to the motivation for the whitehouse to do that so quickly following the event.

It is because of these loose ends that these "theories" exist and as long as they are not credibly spoken to by the authorities, the authorities in question will not be out from under the burden of incredulity they are under.

[FuXnDajenariht]

i dont think 99.9% of the population including myself, even knew that the Bin Ladens stayed here let alone where they were located.

[Newb]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
Merry-

The 911 thing is still a huge flap all over the place and the problem is exactly the evidence. This in turn has fueled wilder and wilder conspiracy theories.

If everything and I mean Everything was put on the table, it would probably shut down a lot of the conspiracy theories.

despite the commision report, there is still a lot of unanswered questions about that day. At the very least we know that someone is not forthcoming.

I mean, I understand why the Bin Ladens were flown out of the States. Probably had a lot to do with not wanting a lynch mob wasting them. But the immediacy of it was weird and it's never been spoken to as to the motivation for the whitehouse to do that so quickly following the event.

It is because of these loose ends that these "theories" exist and as long as they are not credibly spoken to by the authorities, the authorities in question will not be out from under the burden of incredulity they are under.


Ok bare minimum here. At a bare minimum, with normal US defences, the 3rd airplane would not have been able to hit the Pentagon. This is going by BARE MINIMUM of course. Either security was SO HORRIBLE that things like this can just happen, or more likely, someone turned off some section of the security for about 2 hours that morning.

[ZIM]

"I'll take 'summarizing the main questions of the 9/11 Commission' for 300, Alex."

Here's a fun one. (http://rumandmonkey.com/widgets/tests/apocalypse/)
I'm a New Media Professional. :)

[Newb]

Originally posted by ZIM
"I'll take 'summarizing the main questions of the 9/11 Commission' for 300, Alex."

Here's a fun one. (http://rumandmonkey.com/widgets/tests/apocalypse/)
I'm a New Media Professional. :)


Which Survivor of the Impending Nuclear Apocalypse Are You?
It's not unusual to survive my, my, myyyyyy apocalypse, because you're everybody's favourite Welshman,

Tom Jones!

I'm Motherfunkin Tom Jones....baby

[MonkeySlap Too]

Kung Lek - Richard Clark authortized their departure... Which but one of dozens of factual errors in Farenheit 911 - when Moore attributed this to Bush.

These guys are high rollers, and known to the government. The question to be asked isn't 'why did we let them go', but 'what did they do after they left?'

Now that, I bet would surprise everyone.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Kung Lek, your 'world view' prevents you from taking any action.

Sure most middle eastern religions can be twisted towards war - although Christianty is the one with the least doctrinal support for such behavior.

The big DIFFERENCE however is that Islam actually preaches war TODAY in Mosques around the world. It is DOCTRINE that non-muslims are to be enslaved, killed, or beaten into subjagation until they pay outrageous taxes and accept second-class citizenship or become Muslim. In the Koran GOD says it's okay top rape female captives and that you should never accept a kew or a christian as a friend.

I go into peals of laughter when Islamic apologists come out and say "I'm misunderstanding" - when I am using the doctrines and teachings TAUGHT TODAY.

This translates into a clear and present danger. Islam as an ideology represents a horrible threat to anyone who beleives in liberty and freedom.

Read a littler history. Sure Jews and Christians have thier moments. Middle Eastern religions tend to be exclusionary and wacky in their execution. But neither groups preach the wacky stuff today, and the wacky stuff is not as central or even applicable in their scriptures, unlike Islam, where GOD commands you to kill the unclean Khuffar (unbeleiver.)

Dude, it's scary stuff, and you have got to be blinded by your own ideology not to recognize that this might be a threat.

Heck, for saying this, Muslims are required to kill me. How ignorant is THAT?

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Kung Lek, your 'world view' prevents you from taking any action.

Sure most middle eastern religions can be twisted towards war - although Christianty is the one with the least doctrinal support for such behavior.

The big DIFFERENCE however is that Islam actually preaches war TODAY in Mosques around the world. It is DOCTRINE that non-muslims are to be enslaved, killed, or beaten into subjagation until they pay outrageous taxes and accept second-class citizenship or become Muslim. In the Koran GOD says it's okay top rape female captives and that you should never accept a kew or a christian as a friend.

I go into peals of laughter when Islamic apologists come out and say "I'm misunderstanding" - when I am using the doctrines and teachings TAUGHT TODAY.

This translates into a clear and present danger. Islam as an ideology represents a horrible threat to anyone who beleives in liberty and freedom.

Read a littler history. Sure Jews and Christians have thier moments. Middle Eastern religions tend to be exclusionary and wacky in their execution. But neither groups preach the wacky stuff today, and the wacky stuff is not as central or even applicable in their scriptures, unlike Islam, where GOD commands you to kill the unclean Khuffar (unbeleiver.)

Dude, it's scary stuff, and you have got to be blinded by your own ideology not to recognize that this might be a threat.

Heck, for saying this, Muslims are required to kill me. How ignorant is THAT?


My LaRouchie friends were at a Billy Graham event in Los Angeles a month or two ago, organizing religious Christain Zealots to be better people. The group PROTESTING were saying Billy Graham is too SOFT! That God HATES H omosexuals. He doesn't love everybody. They believe that Jesus Christ is going to come down and allow the Jews to repent one time and 'become Christains'. Whoever does not, dies in a massive fire. The "Christains" are teleported with Jesus Christ physically into heaven. All this will happen when the war of Armageddon comes in the 'Holy land'.


There is huge hate crime in Judiasm and Islam too. I wont get into the specifics of this either, unless you want me to. The point I want to make is that all these events are sponsored by billions of dollars of drug money through agents like Rev. Moon. Please do not focus your hate on 1 group as a scapegoat, it will not help you, and hurt everyone.

/edit In order to have peace, we should work with other people to come to agreements on projects of development and progress. The problem isn't "Islam", it's "Globalizaiton".

[MonkeySlap Too]

Please don't get me wrong. I don't HATE anyone. I've met and known some wonderful people who were nominally muslims. I'm sure there were nice Nazis too. There are really two steps - don't accept their hate message/call them on it. and 2.) stand firm when they try to kill you.

Sure there are hate-filled Jews and Christians - but Judaism has evolved a great deal from it's early days, and only a few fringe groups espouse really vile stuff.

Christianity actually should not allow the behavior you describe, as it is not scriptually valid. But like most 'my god is better than your god' religions, Christianity tends to produce a lot of people with loose screws.

Islam though, stands along in its aggressive, hate-filled message. Neither Christianity or Judaism proclaim it a rule of GOD to kill and subjugate unbeleivers. Islam does, and preaches acting on it. (I admit early Judaism was very similar, but there are significant differences insofar as the focus on righteousness. Judaism even as militant Judaism requires being righteous. Islam has only one unforgivable sin - not beleiving.

You are fooling yourself or not really looking if you beleive otherwise.

While I admire the good works done by many religous groups, I also look at ALL of them with a jaundiced eye. Their behavior has more to do with the members psychosis than any divine inspiration. But Islam is a clear and present danger. I don't beive that most Muslims would act on the villianous teachings - but enough can and do. Remember, it was the Islamic religous students who killed the Armenians in the streets of Istanbul, when all they wanted was releif from the murders, theivery and rapes caused by their dhimmi status under Islam.

Very unusual behavior for religous students.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Globalization is possibly the best thing to happen to this planet. It is not perfect. It has flaws. Big ones. But it produces more good than harm.

[Newb]

I think we should look at the verses in question, and also look at them in context for the time. Would you happen to have the names of the verses in question on you?

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Globalization is possibly the best thing to happen to this planet. It is not perfect. It has flaws. Big ones. But it produces more good than harm.


Are you talking about Adam Smith Economics?

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Kung Lek - Richard Clark authortized their departure... Which but one of dozens of factual errors in Farenheit 911 - when Moore attributed this to Bush.

These guys are high rollers, and known to the government. The question to be asked isn't 'why did we let them go', but 'what did they do after they left?'

Now that, I bet would surprise everyone.


Perhaps Moore was on a time restraint, but it wasn't very smart of him to completely ignore Richard Clark authorizing their departure. It's not like Richard Clark was getting money like Bush Sr. was, at least I don't *think* he was. I'd also like to get a link to where you read that too if you wouldn't mind.

[MonkeySlap Too]

I can pull the surahs and commentary, but that will take time I don't have. The good thing, they don't HIDE any of this stuff.

Most of the time, Muslims claim you aren't understanding it right. This is in fact, wrong. You'll note the major Islamic centers PREACH the hate and war-like behavior. They just lie about it to the Khuffar. It's called Taqiyah or something like that. It's okay to lie about your beleifs and intentions to the Khuffar (unbeleiver). GOD said so.


As far as Richard Clark - I saw him on a news show say as much, so unfortunately I have no link, but i'm sure one was out there.

Michael Moore does a lot of damage to his cause by his willingness to obfuscate and lie on a scale that is just staggering. I have zero respect for people who just beleive him (or anyone) without even a minor fact check. And a minor fact check is all it takes to debunk him.

Adam Smith? Who are you kidding?

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
I can pull the surahs and commentary, but that will take time I don't have. The good thing, they don't HIDE any of this stuff.

Most of the time, Muslims claim you aren't understanding it right. This is in fact, wrong. You'll note the major Islamic centers PREACH the hate and war-like behavior. They just lie about it to the Khuffar. It's called Taqiyah or something like that. It's okay to lie about your beleifs and intentions to the Khuffar (unbeleiver). GOD said so.


As far as Richard Clark - I saw him on a news show say as much, so unfortunately I have no link, but i'm sure one was out there.

Michael Moore does a lot of damage to his cause by his willingness to obfuscate and lie on a scale that is just staggering. I have zero respect for people who just beleive him (or anyone) without even a minor fact check. And a minor fact check is all it takes to debunk him.

Adam Smith? Who are you kidding?


There are about over 1 Billion muslims in the world. Are you sure you're correct when you say "You'll note the major Islamic centers PREACH the hate and war-like behavior." because that's news to me.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Absoloutly certain. I get translations of major sermons sent to me from a friend who is in the um, watching business. Scary stuff.

Go check out the text books used in Islamic schools in the U.S.

Dude, people are sleepwalking through this. We need to make the Islamic world face themselves, or else the end result will be tragic.

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Absoloutly certain. I get translations of major sermons sent to me from a friend who is in the um, watching business. Scary stuff.

Go check out the text books used in Islamic schools in the U.S.

Dude, people are sleepwalking through this. We need to make the Islamic world face themselves, or else the end result will be tragic.

You are absolutely certian you say, that most of the Islamic centers in the world preach the hate and war like behavior? Although there are over a billion Muslims?

[ZIM]

A small sampling (http://www.prophetofdoom.net/quotes2.html) from Mo, may spit be upon him.

[Newb]

Originally posted by ZIM
A small sampling (http://www.prophetofdoom.net/quotes2.html) from Mo, may spit be upon him.

I could also get as many quotes from the Old Testiment of the Christains and the Jews that would make your skin curl too.

[Reggie1]

Originally posted by Newb
I could also get as many quotes from the Old Testiment of the Christains and the Jews that would make your skin curl too.

#1--I'd like to see you bring up as many as that. Please feel free to try.

#2--In the Christian religion, one is taught to follow Jesus. Jesus essentially says to disregard the old laws and follow his teachings. Where is that in the Koran?

[Newb]

This isn't a p issing contest on who can post the most barbaric text, spinning it out of context from other religions. Actions even speak louder than words. If you want to really get into these ancient arguments, look at the holy crusades then. The Crusaders killed every person they could find in horrific ways, looted, plundered, and raped under the name of the Holy Father. They killed Muslims and Jews wherever they found them. When the Muslim army returned and reclaimed the land, they allowed the Crusaders to go home.



The point is, you guys are trying to as Leo Strauss would say, Identify the 'other'. Surely terrorism is not our own powerful nations faults, it's gotta be them sand people a thousand miles away. The United States and Britain in the last 40 years, have done much more damage and sponsored terror, than any middle eastern country could fathom. Your enemy is NOT Islam. Your enemy is people in the US and Britain who want to start a holy religious war, stop falling for it.

[norther practitioner]

:o

geez guys...

by doing this much bickering, sometimes it is hard to see that you could actually practice what you preach.....:rolleyes:

[Reggie1]

Originally posted by Newb
This isn't a p issing contest on who can post the most barbaric text, spinning it out of context from other religions. Actions even speak louder than words. If you want to really get into these ancient arguments, look at the holy crusades then. The Crusaders killed every person they could find in horrific ways, looted, plundered, and raped under the name of the Holy Father. They killed Muslims and Jews wherever they found them. When the Muslim army returned and reclaimed the land, they allowed the Crusaders to go home.

Touche. Great point!

I now just have to point this out as funny.

You said:


I could also get as many quotes from the Old Testiment of the Christains and the Jews that would make your skin curl too.

Then I said:


#1--I'd like to see you bring up as many as that. Please feel free to try.

Then you said:


This isn't a p issing contest on who can post the most barbaric text, spinning it out of context from other religions.

So I guess you really can't, then, huh? :D

Just messin' with ya.

[Newb]

Originally posted by Reggie1
Touche. Great point!

I now just have to point this out as funny.

You said:



Then I said:



Then you said:



So I guess you really can't, then, huh? :D

Just messin' with ya.


Like I said earlier, I *COULD* post a bunch of inflammitory bigoted comments twisting the most barbaric aspects of those religions, including Islam out of context, sure. But I'm not going to. It's pointless. The idea is to find solutions, NOT find other people to describe as our made up problem. The problem of the US stems from the people of the US not taking responsibility of their bought out puppet governments in the Democratic and Republican Party.

[Reggie1]

Originally posted by Newb
Like I said earlier, I *COULD* post a bunch of inflammitory bigoted comments twisting the most barbaric aspects of those religions, including Islam out of context, sure. But I'm not going to. It's pointless. The idea is to find solutions, NOT find other people to describe as our made up problem. The problem of the US stems from the people of the US not taking responsibility of their bought out puppet governments in the Democratic and Republican Party.

Geez, you really don't lighten up, do you? :D


Just messin' with ya.

I meant that part. Just trying to lighten up the conversation a bit. Quite the serious one, aren't we?

[Newb]

Originally posted by Reggie1
Geez, you really don't lighten up, do you? :D



I meant that part. Just trying to lighten up the conversation a bit. Quite the serious one, aren't we?

My Bad...Hows the new....um...alcoholic breverage of the day? Quite good, yes?

[MonkeySlap Too]

NEWB SAID:

"The point is, you guys are trying to as Leo Strauss would say, Identify the 'other'. Surely terrorism is not our own powerful nations faults, it's gotta be them sand people a thousand miles away. The United States and Britain in the last 40 years, have done much more damage and sponsored terror, than any middle eastern country could fathom. Your enemy is NOT Islam. Your enemy is people in the US and Britain who want to start a holy religious war, stop falling for it."


You are not paying attention. The Crusades were a response to hundreds of years of Islamic aggression. Sure people in those days were unacceptable by our standards. But the Europeans changed, but the Muslims remain the same.

This tit-for-tat finding verses thing is a specious argument at best. Islam preaches what it preaches, and it thier religious duty to make YOU the 'khuffar' beleive it is not true until they can either kill, convert, or enslave you.

This is what they preach, and it has justified over a century of brutality, that continues to this day.

I can't offer you a 'god' to replace any of theirs. I just want to live free for my time, and my kids to be free from the oppressive yoke of Islam.

Sure GB and the U.S. have done some sh!tty things, but show me who else has done more good than these countries. I dare you.

Now is not the time to kick back and engage in self-loathing. Now is the time to say no to a cruel and unjust force. Put the burden of proof on THEM. Remember, Islam means submission, not peace. And peace is only promised for muslims, not the khuffar. Yet the Islamic world has never really had peace, they always sought war.

Read some history, and more importantly read what they preach. I wasn't looking for an 'other.' I have had this argument in mind long before 9/11. Just because I am open to other cultures, soesn't mean I have to accept the ones that want to kill me just for being who I am. And i won't engage in the silly self-loathing you are exhibiting.

[ZIM]

Originally posted by Newb
Like I said earlier, I *COULD* post a bunch of inflammitory bigoted comments twisting the most barbaric aspects of those religions, including Islam out of context, sure. But I'm not going to. It's pointless. The idea is to find solutions, NOT find other people to describe as our made up problem. The problem of the US stems from the people of the US not taking responsibility of their bought out puppet governments in the Democratic and Republican Party. The difference is, I posted direct quotes, without commentary, yet you'd need to find "inflammitory bigoted comments twisting the most barbaric aspects of those religions".

Its plain as day. For a muslim to deny that these are the words of Mo' is to deny Islam. Its what they teach, in short.

The rest of your statement is, OTOH, inflammatory. Doubtless not your intent. I shall studiously ignore it.

[David Jamieson]

you guys are talking total **** and i don't know why you bother.

clearly you ahve a stance and yer stickin to it.

the crusades were NOT a response, they were an agendized plan to capture jerusalem made by europeans. The first was began under pope Urban the 2nd. Start there if ya wanna know what that was about.

as for the old testament, there are several passges in teh old testament where god tells the jews to go out and kill everyone who was not one of them.

tidbits:

from exodus:

And when Moses saw that the people were naked; (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame among their enemies)

Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD's side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him.

And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.

And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.

For Moses had said, Consecrate yourselves today to the LORD, even every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day.

Then Moses said, "You have been set apart to the LORD today, for you were against your own sons and brothers, and he has blessed you this day."

From Leviticus:

Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.

Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

From Numbers:

And the LORD spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho, saying,

Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye are passed over Jordan into the land of Canaan ;

Then ye shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you, and destroy all their pictures, and destroy all their molten images, and quite pluck down all their high places:

And ye shall dispossess the inhabitants of the land, and dwell therein: for I have given you the land to possess it.

And ye shall divide the land by lot for an inheritance among your families: and to the more ye shall give the more inheritance, and to the fewer ye shall give the less inheritance: every man's inheritance shall be in the place where his lot falleth; according to the tribes of your fathers ye shall inherit.

But if ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be *****s in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell.

Moreover it shall come to pass, that I shall do unto you, as I thought to do unto them.

and so on, there's lot's of commands to kill all non-jews in teh old testament. But let's get some perspective here. These boopks were penned by men for men in a time when things were more savage...or maybe not.

Monkeyslap- There may very well be some imams who want to fight the good fight against the agression against arab nations by the british, the americans and the israelis and all who are their cohorts.

How is this different from Bushes "coallition of the willing" (which is apparently becoming less willing with each passing day.

Islam make two distinctions, One, Islam is "the faith" and two, Muslims are "the faithful".

Any religion that has in it that it is ok to kill those that are not like you is coming from a perspective that has nothing to do with spirituality really and has more to do with a perversion of the faiths to use them to incite people to do things that fit into a geo political agenda of a small group of people.

There are as many so called Christian churches and a great many popular ministers who condone the attrocity of war. Especially those in teh United states, and they even give these guys airtime! Jerry Falwell and his ilk of course come to mind. These are not Christians any more than muslim preachers calling for the killing of others are islamic or Rabbis condoning violence against others are jews. They are merely wearing the trappings and using their religiosity to push an agenda.

what's very important to note is where the majour manipulation and aggression is coming from and believe it or not, it ain't islam, 911 or no.

Let's even take into account the 911 event. Was that a response? Or was it an initiative? If it was the latter who stands to gain and what do they gain?

The whole "they hate liberty and freedom" shpiel is utter nonsense that even a kid in kindergarten should have half a brain to see through.

In fact, lets take a look at who were the only ones to use nuclear weapons on another nation? And then look at who tehy used them on and what state was that country in when they were used.

It does no use to minimize the aggressive and expansionist stance of european nations and the USA. This is transparent and mere lies.

My action is to not support it and to ensure that I participate in elections in my country that will ensure that our politicos do not support these aggressive actiosn against anyone.

Face it, these players are like heroin addicts and each day it seems more and more looking back through time that the USA, Britain and others cannot get off the rig and get over their need for war.

sickening.

By the way, the arab nations are the least of the USA's worries.
Your economy will be dwarfed in 10 years by Chinas. Your ties to Europe will be cut for the interfernce in the interests of those european nations who have invested billions into the region only to have that mucked up by the likes of bush and his warhawks.

Watch your back america, your president has made more enemies than some guys in a desert a half a world away. Your enemies are in your gates right now. Some of them are in positions of trust.

I am sorry to say it, but it is going to get a hella lot worse before it gets any better and the US is stretched pretty thin with the ability to defend never mind any more conqering.

speaking of conquering, lets look through history and see how that goes for each and every expansionist. hmmmmn

[ZIM]

yeah yeah yeah Canada's next on their list.

[David Jamieson]

lol.

who's list? :D

[Reggie1]

Originally posted by Newb
My Bad...Hows the new....um...alcoholic breverage of the day? Quite good, yes?

Much better! That made me laugh out loud.

[HopGar]

Ok, I feel a need to clear this up, because this is completely out of context.

"And when Moses saw that the people were naked; (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame among their enemies) Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD's side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men."

Ok First of all, this was Jews vs. fellow Jews. Not Jews vs. non-jews. This was right after the golden calf was created. Second, those who were killed had worshipped idols and several other sins punishable by death. Anyone who has read a bible with a somewhat credible translation knows that idol worship is punishable by death (King James doesn't count.)

"For Moses had said, Consecrate yourselves today to the LORD, even every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day. Then Moses said, "You have been set apart to the LORD today, for you were against your own sons and brothers, and he has blessed you this day."

This was the result. There was a fundamental switch here. Originally, the plan was that first-born males would serve in the temple, but after the golden calf, it was changed to the tribe of levi due to their zealousness to follow the word of G-d.

From Leviticus:

"Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour."

This may be true, I won't deny it. However, there is something fundamental that is not in the verses and is interpreted by the rabbis: The slaves get treated like part of the master's family. This is fundamentally different from that which we're used to hearing about. This slave can go free if the master causes them intentional harm. There were also plenty of Jewish slaves as a result not being able to pay off debts or as a punishment for theft. I don't want to get into the technicalities of this, so don't ask.

From Numbers:

"And the LORD spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye are passed over Jordan into the land of Canaan; Then ye shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you, and destroy all their pictures, and destroy all their molten images, and quite pluck down all their high places: And ye shall dispossess the inhabitants of the land, and dwell therein: for I have given you the land to possess it. And ye shall divide the land by lot for an inheritance among your families: and to the more ye shall give the more inheritance, and to the fewer ye shall give the less inheritance: every man's inheritance shall be in the place where his lot falleth; according to the tribes of your fathers ye shall inherit. But if ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be *****s in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell. Moreover it shall come to pass, that I shall do unto you, as I thought to do unto them."

First, this is in deuteronomy. Yes, this is true. I point at subsequent jewish history to prove that this was and is still a good idea. Look at all of the problems that occured because we didn't kick out the people there. Look in judges and how many times the phillistines caused problems because we did not remove them.

More to come later, if necessary

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Newb
When the Muslim army returned and reclaimed the land, they allowed the Crusaders to go home.

I think you mean reconquered, not reclaimed. And there we see the error which undermines your entire position.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
the crusades were NOT a response, they were an agendized plan to capture jerusalem made by europeans. The first was began under pope Urban the 2nd. Start there if ya wanna know what that was about.

Close, but not quite. I'll raise your "Pope Urban II" with a "Emperor Alexius I." Hint: Byzantine emperor who requested European aid against Muslim imperialism before the First Crusade.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Newb
The problem <is> "Globalizaiton".

"Agriculture, for example, is an area of competitive advantage for the developing world: yet the most developed [countries] spend US$350-billion a year subsidizing agriculture compared to US$60-billion a year on foreign aid, a ratio of 6:1. The poor stay poor in part because producer groups in agriculture, clothing, textiles, etc., use their political power to close markets [by demanding the aforementioned subsidies and thus making it impossible for developing countries to compete for consumers, in spite of the latter's natural advantage]." From Wishful Thinking Won't End Poverty by Thomas S. Axworthy, published in [i]The National Post.

The Doha Development Agenda is going to decrease the amount of people currently making less than $2 USD/day by 500 million over 15 years (25% decrease in world poverty), and increase the economies of developing countries by $200 billion USD/annum (4x the amount they currently receive from aid) by opening up these agricultural markets (1 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0881323659/qid=1093580284/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/102-0098045-8748942?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)).

This isn't a problem; people starving to death every day is a problem. This is a solution -- and it's the best one we've got.

[red5angel]

two things make my head hurt: One is religion. why? Because it's used as an excuse by people from all different kinds of beliefs to do whatever the hell they want. Is one worse then the other? No, they all suck, and the people who mindlessly follow them suck even worse. At some point, I hope a revolution comes and the religious zealots of the planet, whether they live in america or in Iraq, get wiped out. Utterly and completely. We have the capability, we just need to get the ballz.

The second thing is Newb. why? Newb is our new resident paranoid, conspiracy theory loony. I'd cut and paste, but this entire thread is full of all the examples you'll ever need.

[MonkeySlap Too]

Kung Lek,
Well others got to clearing up your tit-for-tat, and you need to remember that the Muslims invaded conqured, and converted by the sword the middle East and were at the gates of Byzantium. You need to read more history than the Noam Chomsky crowd will allow.

The fundamental difference between the exclusionary behavior and killing in the Torah, and the same in the Koran, is that in the Koran, YOU are exhorted to do it right now. In the Torah, it was historical, not an ongoing commandment, and 'ordered by god' for a specific purpose. The Jews aren't commanded to 'kill the infidels wherever they find them' or to 'lie about thier true purposes', or to 'beat the khuffar about the neck unril they submit.' It's those lucky followers of Mo'.

the Ayatollah Khommenhi (SP?) used to exhort his imans to spend less time on the verses that taught kindness and give more importance to the ones that preached killing!

Heres my beef - it is the mainstream of Islamic thought that is warlike and hate-filled. To not confront this is the height of arrogance.

Oh, and people in high office that hate America? Yeah, we call them Democrats over here :)

I'm glad you pointed out that our European 'allies' are converned more about money than anything else. I thought that was obvious, but with the lack og good education in history in public schools, I didn't think most people caught that. Frankly, I don't understand the passion for Europe. Most of my family is there, but if I wanted to be poor, I'd just move to Alabama and enjoy the gulf weather...

Kung Lek, I encourage to begin a dialogue with these people you are defending, but I think you would just accept what they say to you because 'it is true for them.'

Yeesh, are you sure you didn't go to college in the states?

[Newb]

The second thing is Newb. why? Newb is our new resident paranoid, conspiracy theory loony. I'd cut and paste, but this entire thread is full of all the examples you'll ever need.


Oh but my dear friend, your fallacy falls apart if someone asks you to give them at least 1 example. Let's discuss it point by point, and we'll see who'se out of touch with reality.

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too

Heres my beef - it is the mainstream of Islamic thought that is warlike and hate-filled. To not confront this is the height of arrogance.

Oh, and people in high office that hate America? Yeah, we call them Democrats over here :)



It's odd that you say Democrats hate America when the Bush Administration has by the US Army War College and the top ranking millitary men, distroyed the US Millitary and made it less secure. Both Bush presidencies have been financial disasters, when even this Administrations own cooked books show a disaster on their watch. The Bush administration has distroyed more of the Constitution than any President, excluded us from the world, brought us in a illegal war using fraud of WMD as their basis, yet you claim the Democrats hate America! Sure, some Democrats and Republicans hate America. They are the Synarchist banking agents such as Felix Rohatyn, George Soros, and George Shultz; but for the time being, the Republicans have helped distroy America more than any "Bill Clinton" Democrat. I'm sure I'm goign to hear all of a sudden how this war in Iraq was a great idea, how there are WMD or it doesn't matter that there aren't any WMD, how the top generals and US War College is completely wrong, how the economy where the prices of houses double in less than 3 years is a sign of a good economy and so on.

[red5angel]

Oh but my dear friend, your fallacy falls apart if someone asks you to give them at least 1 example. Let's discuss it point by point, and we'll see who'se out of touch with reality.

I'm not your freind, stop sounding pretentious. As for point by point, we can work through your first post on this thread through to your last.
The problem with paranoids is they have plenty of "evidence" to back up there theory, usually other paranoids as reference. Trust me Newb, you're not the first guy to come through here with your bizarre beliefs, and you won't be the last. Christopher M. our resident big brain has been shooting you apart from the word go but you won't see it. You cna't your fantasy world is to strong and your ego would shatter to have to come back to reality.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
I'm not your freind, stop sounding pretentious. As for point by point, we can work through your first post on this thread through to your last.
The problem with paranoids is they have plenty of "evidence" to back up there theory, usually other paranoids as reference. Trust me Newb, you're not the first guy to come through here with your bizarre beliefs, and you won't be the last. Christopher M. our resident big brain has been shooting you apart from the word go but you won't see it. You cna't your fantasy world is to strong and your ego would shatter to have to come back to reality.

But with such big words, surely you can back it up, right?

PS: I checked and Christopher M responded to 2 of my replies. One dealing with the Crusaders and how the muslims let them live after the Crusaders killed everyone they saw in their way; and the 2nd is on economics. You took the first step and said Christopher M has been distroying my arguments. Well you have shown no understanding of economics in our discussions, so I think you might not even know economics to begin with. Therefore, you should join in on the debate Christopher and I will have about economics when I reply to him, so the world can see how much you know and how you think as well. It's only fair if you're going to insult me without any backup.

[Newb]

Originally posted by Christopher M
I think you mean reconquered, not reclaimed. And there we see the error which undermines your entire position.

Sorry, but most lands were conquered at one point or another. It depends on how you treat the people once it is conquered. Would you compare how the Persian Empire conquered its surrounding nations and made it's people their slaves, to how Alexander the Great conquered Persia, and treated them properly? Would you compare how Gen. Doughlas Macarthur conquered the Japanese (and no, he did not get to vote to nuke them, he didn't want to nuke them, there was no land war necissary in mainland Japan) to how the Japanese treated the Chinese they conquered? Of course not. There are humane ways of doing it. The Christain Crusaders were some of the most bloodthirsty, anti-humane, robbing, pillaging, raping hoardes this world has ever seen. The fact that the Muslim caliphs who took the cities back from this group and spared their lives after they desecrated everyone, is the point I wanted to make. In no way does that undermine my position in any way.

[Newb]

Originally posted by Christopher M
Classical liberals are generally minarchists, not anarchists. The difference is fundamental, because the sort of argument you offer here only attacks the anarchist position. The anarchist classical liberal says 'get rid of all state structures,' to which you could reply that that would facilitate monopolies which would violate free market principles and thus defeat the strength of the classical liberal position in the first place.

On the other hand, the minarchist classical liberal says 'I endorse the free market.' This is a prima facie endorsement of any X where X increases the freedom of the market. If you suggest that getting rid of Y would violate free market principles, it's then specious to conclude that the minarchist classical liberal would want to get rid of Y. Your argument that this position would result in monopoly is then invalid.



It hasn't ever even been tried. One important difference between the classical liberals and the classical socialists is that the former advocated a gradual development of society and the latter advocated revolution to create sudden change. One effect this has had is that we've got to observe a number of socialist experiments but we're still on our way towards (or away from) classical liberalism. The best examples I can think of off-hand are the new economies of New Zealand and Ireland, which have been very successful so far, but are still too young to really tell. And even they are far from the ideal.



I am a supporter of Alexander Hamiltonian banking and the American System of Political Economy as shown more recently by Abraham Lincoln, FDR, and John F. Kennedy. Of course all these men made mistakes, but they are great examples of hwo regulating essential commodities such as industry that we need to live off, and not giving it all to a 'free trade invisible hand God' that will simply 'take care of everything for us' works. Human beings can be organized to work together to build a world that we can plan over 20 years in advance. If we invest in the right technologies that develop new industries which allow us to work faster and more effeciently, and we continue to grow towards that, we can have a great global recovery. We also have to make sure our population that we invest 25 years in before they can give back to the economy is well protected, so you need a 'Hil-Burton' type Health Care system that focuses on prevention so your population is healthy and more likely to live long. Quite frankly, Adam Smith free trade gives the financial oligarchy freedom to loot nations of their wealth and resources. We have commited genocide upon the 3rd world for far too long, and either we have to go in and conquer them with our millitary, then turn the people in literal slaves (not just virtual slaves like they are now) and have them work for us; or we need a new just financial system that is fair and pro-development.

I find out you learn alot about people based on their solutions. What do you propose to fix the genocide being commited upon the 3rd world and how would you reorganize the world financial system?

[red5angel]

But with such big words, surely you can back it up, right?

I could, or you could use the search function to see where the very same arguments have been picked a part countless times on this forum.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
I could, or you could use the search function to see where the very same arguments have been picked a part countless times on this forum.

Easy, because you made the claims against me, not the other way around. What if I claimed that you got your ass beat by a 12 year old girl, and then tell you to bring me the proof that you did. That's just silly. Also, you claimed Christoper M has been distroying my arguments from the word GO, but I found only 1 reply from Christopher M. regarding economics to me that I forgot to reply to. That is in no way distroying all of my arguments from the word GO! I already replied to it, and seeing how him and I had only spoken of economics when you wrote that, I assume you want in on the debate so I posted a rebuttal and invited you to reply.

[ZIM]

Originally posted by Newb
Quite frankly, Adam Smith free trade gives the financial oligarchy freedom to loot nations of their wealth and resources. We have commited genocide upon the 3rd world for far too long, and either we have to go in and conquer them with our millitary, then turn the people in literal slaves (not just virtual slaves like they are now) and have them work for us; or we need a new just financial system that is fair and pro-development.

I find out you learn alot about people based on their solutions. What do you propose to fix the genocide being commited upon the 3rd world and how would you reorganize the world financial system? You have many a priori assumptions in the above, not all of which the various parties to this argument would agree to. If we can't speak the same language, then why argue?

For instance:
"financial oligarchy" smacks of pure paraniod BS. Tell me: Who are "they"?

"not just virtual slaves like they are now" is an assertion. The burden of proof for it rests with you.

"fix the genocide being commited upon the 3rd world" another pair of assertions. Who is doing the genocide, is any in fact is going on?

"reorganize the world financial system" assumes it needs 'reorganizing' from a top-down point of view. Perhaps not.

[David Jamieson]

and now, for a little levity from an american, I don't know which one:


COWS
Is it just me, or does anyone else find it amazing that our government can
track a cow born in Canada almost three years ago, right to the stall where
she sleeps in the state of Washington. And they tracked her calves to their
stalls. But they are unable to locate 11 million illegal aliens wandering
around our country. Maybe we should give them all a cow.

CONSTITUTION
They keep talking about drafting a Constitution for Iraq. Why don't we just
give them ours? It was written by a lot of really smart guys, it's worked
for over 200 years and we're not using it anymore.

TEN COMMANDMENTS
The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments in a Courthouse!
You cannot post "Thou Shall Not Steal," "Thou Shall Not Commit Adultery"
and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building full of lawyers, judges and
politicians! It creates a hostile work environment!

[Newb]

Originally posted by ZIM
[B]You have many a priori assumptions in the above, not all of which the various parties to this argument would agree to. If we can't speak the same language, then why argue?

For instance:
"financial oligarchy" smacks of pure paraniod BS. Tell me: Who are "they"?


You're kidding, right? Do you seriously deny that a oligarchy exists? The world oligarchy is much richer than Bill Gates can imagine. For example, these families own almost all of the resources in Africa which they control through different corporations. The Diamond monopoly, oil trade, gold mines, and so fourth. By US Govt standards, about $600 Billion dollars of terrorist narco-drug money gets laundered and most of it happens in British banks. $600 Billion dollars can buy you trillions of dollards of leverage which you can use at that point to buy out politicians, have 5 companies own almost all the mass media in the USA which spread the filthy propoganda and so fourth. The Trillions of dollars are then turned into hundreds of trillions through deriavitive side bets. This is how a oligarch owned bank like JP Morgan can have over 20 trillion dollars of deriative bets. The British royal monarchy is heavily invested in all of these trades.




"not just virtual slaves like they are now" is an assertion. The burden of proof for it rests with you.


What would you call the African kids who work in George Bush sr's gold mines (Barrick Gold) in the old republic of Congo? What would you call it if you worked on $2 a day, and it didn't buy you much of anything you need to live? Like I said, it's virtual slave labor.



"fix the genocide being commited upon the 3rd world" another pair of assertions. Who is doing the genocide, is any in fact is going on?

The Genocide is going on largely by the governments of the US and Britain who have had a negative population growth policy. If you deny genocide is going on in the world, you really do need to see the light of day my friend. Children die all over the world of diseases that cost pennies to cure, and many of them are overworked to death (and no, not by Saddam Hussein but by US companies such as Nike). The people of Africa and Mexico for example, have no future. We use institutions like the IMF which distroy nations banking system, put them in a unpayable debt and they end up paying much more than they ever borrowed. This debt is then used to devalue the nations currency and make extracting their natural resources to largely US and British (although other countries are guilty too) by using their own population to do the work and pay them peanuts, if that.

The point is, you will see this Genocide hit home hard. This financial system is a fraud to beign with, and as soon as the dollar starts dropping some more, the US financial system will largely unravel. George Bush will steal your grandmothers social security and health care, she will die, so will many others, if we don't stop them. Arnie, Cheneys governator will not be able to keep on borrowing, and the budget cuts for california are a real killer (of course, we are still paying Enron from when they looted us a few years ago). You too will get to feel what it's like to be a 2nd class citizen and have your rights as a human being trampeled on not too far from today, since this banking system is going to go through some horrendous times. Either the bankers win, and you are their slave, or the US System which was founded against the banking establishment of London wins, and we can stop looting the 3rd world and actually develop in a FDR and Abraham Lincoln development policy.

[brothernumber9]

not to detract from the economic discussions, but Newb tried to bring up some WWII aspects, I assume to support his argument, the facts of which were likely wrong depending on his context of how Macarthur "conquered the Japanese." If the statement was in reference only to actions in the Phillipines then agreed. However, if in reference to Japan itself, then disagreed.

[red5angel]

newb, maybe you should bother to read Christophers posts then? Or maybe any of the others refuting what you have to say in detail? that's the problem with guys like you. You keep screaming for proof of this or that, and more detail but you don't bother to back up your own requests unless it comes to an occasional paranoid website that backs up your delusions.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
newb, maybe you should bother to read Christophers posts then? Or maybe any of the others refuting what you have to say in detail?

I have already read and replied to his posts. You claim that I am delusional and paranoid, yet rely on other people to backup your claims. Don't get others to fight your fight, if you think you're right, then you can go ahead and refute me right here.


that's the problem with guys like you. You keep screaming for proof of this or that, and more detail but you don't bother to back up your own requests unless it comes to an occasional paranoid website that backs up your delusions.


The only thing I wanted to post from that website was Irans missle capabilities, which were backed up by US Generals when they ran the losing war game scenarios against Iran. Your constant negative remarks will not get you anywhere. I have posted in depth ideas, and have asked you to participate. If you can't, that's your own problem.

[brothernumber9]

Actually ignore my post, after re-reading I see the main point was on occupation and treatment rather than historical fact, so it doen'st really matter.

[red5angel]

I have already read and replied to his posts. You claim that I am delusional and paranoid, yet rely on other people to backup your claims. Don't get others to fight your fight, if you think you're right, then you can go ahead and refute me right here.

you're not paying attention.



The only thing I wanted to post from that website was Irans missle capabilities, which were backed up by US Generals when they ran the losing war game scenarios against Iran. Your constant negative remarks will not get you anywhere. I have posted in depth ideas, and have asked you to participate. If you can't, that's your own problem.

Then why not post an official website to backup your claims instead of some lunatics website? I found reference to those missiles on several more credible websites.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
you're not paying attention.




Then why not post an official website to backup your claims instead of some lunatics website? I found reference to those missiles on several more credible websites.


I actually am paying attention, you have not backed up one of your claims so fourth, and thus making it impossible to have a dialogue. 2nd, if you already found refrences to those missles on several more credible websites, then you already know it's true. I had recently passed by that link that some other user posted, and I knew the missle information was correct, so I posted it back here. Since the information I'm trying to show you is correct, which you personaly verified in other credible websites, I'm happy.

[ZIM]

What would you call the African kids who work in George Bush sr's gold mines (Barrick Gold) in the old republic of Congo? What would you call it if you worked on $2 a day, and it didn't buy you much of anything you need to live? Like I said, it's virtual slave labor. My brief curiousity was piqued, so I looked up Barrick (http://www.barrick.com/4_Annual_Report/) .

The majoriy of their holdings are in South America, not Africa. Geo. Bush is not listed anywhere in their financial statements, and they operate out of Canada.

No longer curious.

BTW: "Distroy" is spelled with an E.

[red5angel]

Since the information I'm trying to show you is correct, which you personaly verified in other credible websites, I'm happy.

then you're going to be sad, because, much like every other paranoid conspiracy theory website out there, the information is no entirely correct. I'll let you figure out what is and isn't false.





BTW: "Distroy" is spelled with an E.

LOL@ ZIM

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Newb
Sorry, but most lands were conquered at one point or another... Would you compare how the Persian Empire conquered its surrounding nations...

I wouldn't make any "comparison" at all, I would look directly at the events in question: the Holy Lands became Christian through internal revolution, and became Moslem through military conquest, to which other Christians responded. The Moslem expulsion of those Christians isn't called "reclaiming" the Holy Land, it's called reconquering it.


The Christain Crusaders were some of the most bloodthirsty, anti-humane, robbing, pillaging, raping hoardes this world has ever seen.

They could have been led by the Devil himself, and your denial that they were a reaction against Muslim imperialism would still be incorrect. This was the issue at hand.

[ZIM]

The Moslem expulsion of those Christians isn't called "reclaiming" the Holy Land, it's called reconquering it.

A case in point being the Al-Aksa Mosque, and the Dome of the Rock, which is actually a non-Islamic, Byzantine martyrium, with inscriptions in Arabic, but not canonical Qur'anic inscriptions- as almost no one has bothered to point out.

It should be remembered that the Al-Aksa Mosque was placed precisely on the Temple Mount for a nonreligious and geopolitical purpose: To lay claim to a city Holy to both Judaism and Christianity (the competing faiths whose believers had to be forcibly 'reverted' to Islam), and to put a kind of marker of Islamic power (like the American flag at Iwo Jima) right smack on top of the Holiest site where the Temple of the Jews had stood.
Indeed, the identification of "the ****hest mosque"- "al-masjid al-aksa" in the Qur'an- from which Mo' was said to have taken off on his miraj, or Night Journey, flying heavenwards on his fabulous winged steed al-Buraq, was deliberately identified with Jerusalem only after some time, and discussion had gone on, and most likely it took place as a way to allow the Umayyad caliphates to lay claim, from Damascus, to Jerusalem.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Newb
Quite frankly, Adam Smith free trade gives the financial oligarchy freedom to loot nations of their wealth and resources.

You've got it completely backwards -- free trade is what prevents richer nations from looting the poorer ones. Every nation has some area of competitive advantage wherein it can produce more efficiently than others. Without free trade, what happens is that the richer nations impose tariffs and subsidize national industries to eliminate the competitive advantages of the poorer countries. The classic example of this is agriculture -- the governments of the richest countries spend US$350 billion a year protecting their agriculture industries. This is why the poorer countries are demanding free trade, and the richer countries are denying it.

I've already posted on this (bottom of page 10). It's also the major point Adam Smith makes in the Wealth of Nations; which makes me wonder if you've read it.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
then you're going to be sad, because, much like every other paranoid conspiracy theory website out there, the information is no entirely correct. I'll let you figure out what is and isn't false.






LOL@ ZIM


To quote "Brian the dog" from Family Guy, "That's either good cheese or bad meat." What is being displayed is either sophistry, or bad logic. Look at my origional post, and the post where I linked the website with the information. My intention in the post the entire time was that a war with Iran will be disasterous, as the own US millitary wargames have shown, and as many top Generals such as former head of CENTCOMs Gen. Anthony Zinni and Gen. Hoar. I am not here saying the information on any of those websites in the entire internet is 100% accurate . Seeing the nature of national defence, Iran itself might be able to throw out wrong figures.

The point is simple. It is confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt, that Iran has several forms of missles and air defence that can severly hurt the US millitary to a point that Mini Tactical Nukes might be used by the neo-cons.

[red5angel]

Yes, your information came from a web site that is at best questionable. We are aware of that. (and how apropriate you quote Family Guy)
However, you obviously don't understand the way escalation warfare works. Oh I know, crazies like you tend to claim that if america backs a muslim country into a corner then they will do anything and everything to strike back. Afghansitan did it...oh wait. Iraq did it....oh wait.
If Iran wants to start a war, and if they want to use mini tactical nukes, then how is that on the heads of the "neo-cons" (a classic paranoid term)?
We have larger, more destructive weapons and we have more then they do. If they can't realize that an attack on us like that would be foolish then so be it.

[David Jamieson]

Barrick is a canadian company and they were involved in the Bre-x scandal and yes they are unscrupulous in their dealings with 3rd world gold mine opportunities.

I think Canadians can often be too quick to see the faults of our neighbours without confronting our own.

All we have going for us is that we are slightly less hegemonic in our approach to foreign policy. Probably has more to do with our lack of population and a strong military frankly. But, that's not the Candian way. :D It's quality not quantity in both the forces of light and darkness up here. :p

[red5angel]

I'd like to point out the canadian "fault" called the jet stream that is going to bring minnesota "highs" of 10 to 20 below zero this coming thursday and friday. grrrrrrrrrrrrrr I'd suggest nuking canada if I thought it would keep us warm.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
Yes, your information came from a web site that is at best questionable. We are aware of that. (and how apropriate you quote Family Guy)
However, you obviously don't understand the way escalation warfare works. Oh I know, crazies like you tend to claim that if america backs a muslim country into a corner then they will do anything and everything to strike back. Afghansitan did it...oh wait. Iraq did it....oh wait.
If Iran wants to start a war, and if they want to use mini tactical nukes, then how is that on the heads of the "neo-cons" (a classic paranoid term)?
We have larger, more destructive weapons and we have more then they do. If they can't realize that an attack on us like that would be foolish then so be it.


Again you have completely missed the point. Let me repeat for a 3rd or 4th time, the very own war games the US Generals ran against Iran all came out to disaster for the USA. The best case scenario involved the entire Indian Ocean fleet sunk, or something to that effect. The US is clearly the aggressor in the middle east. Iraq never attacked the USA, when Bush had the oppertunity to capture Bin Ladin they completely backed off willingly, and has shown utter incompetence and complete disregard for international law. So far the USA has invaded Iraq without justification, therefore I am in the right. Furthermore, you talk big about me being paranid (lol) because I use the word Neo-Con. Neo-Con simply means Neo-Conservative such as the people like **** Cheney, Lynne Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Doughlas Feith, Richard Pearle, Anthony Abrahams, Paul Wolfowitz, "Universal fascist" Michael Ledeen, Condiliza Rice, and blab show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Anne 'baseball bat' Coulter, et. all.


If anyone is paraniod, it's the supporters of the Iraq War who believed the lies about the non existant Weapons of Mass Distruction and Yellow Cake. People who support the bombings, torture, rape, and distruction of Iraq due to non existant weapons of mass distruction. You people are the sick paranoids that have endorsed the policies which have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people in a war with no end in sight, with these policies. It's sickening.

[David Jamieson]

hmmm, maybe if we consider the money aspect of war?

what is it costing you americans to fight this war?

well check it out (http://www.costofwar.com/)

that's a lotta tax dollars, never minds lives and alternative uses of that money.

[norther practitioner]

:o

[David Jamieson]

the embarassment smiley?

[red5angel]

The best case scenario involved the entire Indian Ocean fleet sunk, or something to that effect.

Link? Best Case Scenario? Choose your words wisely young padawan.



The US is clearly the aggressor in the middle east.

Clearly? How do you define what an aggressor is? Is it a nationality? A religion? A scoio-political group? I'm curious.


So far the USA has invaded Iraq without justification, therefore I am in the right.

saying you're right doesn't make it so. why don't you explain to me what "right" is.


Neo-Con simply means Neo-Conservative

I understand what it is supposed to mean, but you paranoid conspiracists use it differently then us normal people.


People who support the bombings, torture, rape, and distruction of Iraq due to non existant weapons of mass distruction

I'm inclined to say the same about the people who think an isolationist attitude is what leads the world to a better place. The same peopl who would sit idolly by while hundreds of thousands of kurds are gassed, while millions of people are subjugated and bent to the will of one man. What's sickens me are the people who can't see th truth beyond their own noses because their too busy throwing their holier then thou attitude around with the "rights" and "wrongs" and "goods" and "evils".

[red5angel]

the embarassment smiley?

That's the "I wish Red would get off my girl" smiley.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
Link? Best Case Scenario? Choose your words wisely young padawan.





Clearly? How do you define what an aggressor is? Is it a nationality? A religion? A scoio-political group? I'm curious.


Are you kidding me?!?!?!?!?!?! THE FREAKING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.



saying you're right doesn't make it so. why don't you explain to me what "right" is.




I understand what it is supposed to mean, but you paranoid conspiracists use it differently then us normal people.


Oh really? So far, the paranoid conspiracy theory was that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass distruction which he could nuke DC in 45 minutes LOL. Talk about PARANOID! Your PARANOYA has made you back a policy that has cost us hundreds of trillions of dollars, countless lives, and even more disasters happening everyday. Ravenous dogs eat the dead in Fallujah and we call it a peace. Sick. back up your quote that I use it differently than you 'normal' people. Show me an example.



I'm inclined to say the same about the people who think an isolationist attitude is what leads the world to a better place. The same peopl who would sit idolly by while hundreds of thousands of kurds are gassed, while millions of people are subjugated and bent to the will of one man. What's sickens me are the people who can't see th truth beyond their own noses because their too busy throwing their holier then thou attitude around with the "rights" and "wrongs" and "goods" and "evils". [/B]

Absolutely not. The USA should nto be a isolated nation. We are due to the stupid policies of Bush. We have isolated ourselves from the rest of the world and our allies, and have now became one of the most hated nations. We should lead as FDR did with a new just financial system which protects people from being looted as they are.

[red5angel]

I don't remember anyone claiming he could nuke DC directly in 45 minutes. Technically, a nuke takes a lot less time to go to work. ;)

No link?




Are you kidding me?!?!?!?!?!?! THE FREAKING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

So you define an aggressor as the president of the united states?


and have now became one of the most hated nations.

is that a fact? What's your source?

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
[B]I don't remember anyone claiming he could nuke DC directly in 45 minutes. Technically, a nuke takes a lot less time to go to work. ;)

No link?


The line that was given repeatedly was that if we waited, the smoking gun would be a mushroom cloud over DC. It was said that Saddam Hussein could deploy WMD withen 45 minutes. It does take some time to actually deploy it ya know.





So you define an aggressor as the president of the united states?


The aggressor in this case was the USA as a nation. Our elected congressmen authorized our elected President to launch war if Saddam Hussein was non compliant with the UN. George Bush kicked out the UN and launched the war. In reality, since the world is complex, I woudlnt' blame George Bush, he is too much of an idiot. I blame the people around George Bush who cited fraudulent evidence such as "Yellow Cake" **** Cheney and the OSP, who were told their information was wrong numerous times.



And yes, the USA being one of the most hated nations in the world is a fact, perhaps the world historic tens of millions rallying against the Iraq war and the attacks on Americans are a good place to start.


Like it or not, the policies of George Bush have helped distroy this nation in almost every single way.

[red5angel]

It was said that Saddam Hussein could deploy WMD withen 45 minutes.

did you find this on the same website you located the info about Iran against the US?


you mean you blame the neocons? ;)

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
did you find this on the same website you located the info about Iran against the US?


you mean you blame the neocons? ;)


No actually, I can't blame the neo-cons too much. If you're walking in the desert and a snake bites you, you don't get mad at the snake, it only did what a snake does. I blame the really stupid and paraniod of people of the USA who believed the delusional lies of **** Cheney and the Neo-Cons that acutally believed a Nation like Iraq actually posed a threat to them. When you have a dumbed down population and they are in a constant state of paraniod fear, they make stupid mistakes and although it is costing hundreds of thousands of lives and costing hundreds of billions of dollars, they cling onto it afraid of the next boogie man. Yup, quite sad.

[ZIM]

in a constant state of paraniod fear

[mortal]

Newb

I keep checking in on your rantings. It amazes me how much energy you put into this internet argument. Go get laid. That is a better way to blow off your liberal america hating steam.

"And yes, the USA being one of the most hated nations in the world is a fact, perhaps the world historic tens of millions rallying against the Iraq war and the attacks on Americans are a good place to start."

If this idiotic statement is true we need to nuke the whole world and start over. Nobody has done more to help the world throughout history than the United states.

I read somewhere on this thread, someone told their conservative parents they were a communist. I say to that person you are a fool beyond anything you could comprehend. It scares me the direction this world is going.

I guess we could thank all the genious liberal professors. These academics are just ****ed that for all their smarts and schooling their not making any money. Then they preach hate and monday morning quarter back on what they would have done different. Duh?

Don't look for a response from me for a while. Unlike you I actually work. Keep up your rantings. Loonies like you are burying the democratic party.

[Newb]

Originally posted by mortal
Newb

I keep checking in on your rantings. It amazes me how much energy you put into this internet argument. Go get laid. That is a better way to blow off your liberal america hating steam.

I guarantee and can show you how the new financial system I propose is the best solution for making the United States the manufactuing and technology giant. The US will more than easily double it's productive capabilities, raise the living standard of almost all the citizens, provide a working and emergency ready health care system, along with more global co-operation. Therefore, I demand the respect that I at least, do not *hate* America. I know more about the contributions of the founding fathers to world history to degrees which you could learn from. Please, let's save the slanders and have a real adult conversation.



I guess we could thank all the genious liberal professors.
I don't know of many or any of genius professors, liberal or not.



Don't look for a response from me for a while. Unlike you I actually work. Keep up your rantings. Loonies like you are burying the democratic party. [/B]

Please stop just assuming things and being so negative! I have had a good steady job for over 5 years if you really want to make a issue of it. I have declared the democratic party dead back in 2000, it's been rotting out for a while. That is why they kept LaRouche out, because they were under big money bankers control. There are crazy fascists in the Democratic Party. Felix Rohatyn actually cut all government responsibilities to people in Queens, Brooklyn, the Bronx, and other poor areas. That means ALL the police, firemen and firestations, hospitals and ambulences, schools, etc. were cut from the city and they were declared DEAD. Felix Rohatyn KILLED parts of New York on a *loan default*. This is COMPLETELY anti-American and unconstitutional. George Soros is of the Similar blood, and so his good buddy, Neo-Con banker elite, George Shultz; the archetict of the of the Bush Administration. Shultz is also equally anti-American.

Therefore, it is not that the Democratic Party are the good guys and Republicans the bad guys, or the other way around. That is how they like to play the people against each other like a football game. There are good, bad, lame duck, or very bad people in each party. You will see who the very bad people are when this financial crisis hits full force. People like Rohatyn will then do this exact same austerity policy on you. They will attempt to distroy your rights to having a government defend you, and under free trade get looted by the 'market forces'.

[red5angel]

in a constant state of paraniod fear

;)


And yes, the USA being one of the most hated nations in the world is a fact, perhaps the world historic tens of millions rallying against the Iraq war and the attacks on Americans are a good place to start

the fact that you state your opinion as fact, backed up by some loose concept of the "rest" of the world shows you're not worthy to argue these points. Unfortunately, you've gone over the edge of having an opinion to stating your opinion as fact, you do it several times in your posts and even claim that because you say a thing, it HAS to be right. Like this:


I guarantee and can show you how the new financial system I propose is the best solution for making the United States the manufactuing and technology giant.

No, you can't. You can show a theory, and you can push the numbers in the right direction to show that you might be correct. That's it, your theory is untested.
But here your megalomania comes out, and reveals yet another underlying psychological flaw to back up all the rest that have squeezed into that tiny little lizard brain of yours. You're now convinced that you alone have come up with a way to save america from itself, double the standard of living, atleast and make america a much better place. What's your career exactly? Are you running for office somewhere with the intent to work your way up to President of the US so you can fix the place? :rolleyes:




I know more about the contributions of the founding fathers to world history to degrees which you could learn from.

more ego. I need to bookmark this post, so that anyone who wants to argue with you can see that there is no arguing. Not only have you convinced yourself in your paranoid delusions that you are right in all things, you demand to be recognized for it and insist we don't know what we are talking about. In essence, you're ego won't allow you to learn anything from a discussion, you're here to preach the word of Newb, and spread your disease, not have an adult conversation. I charge you're not capable of an adult conversation. you're like a petulant child who throws tantrums and demands to be recognized and paid attention too. You can't have an adult intercourse because you're not interested in interreacting. You're only interested in insisiting you're right and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong. You're like a worthless robot, blabbering out predetermined rhetoric endlessly in the face of all reason. What's sick is you, and it's too bad you won't ever see that.

Up until the last 24 hours I was ready to lump you in with all the other Paranoid looneys we have on this site. however, I have to say you have far surpassed them in sheer crazyness. they never demand to be respected, require others to acknowledge their superior intellect, or insist that everyone else has no idea what they are talking about. They may not agree with the rest of us normal people, but they certainly haven't reached the heights of sheer madness you're bordering on.

[red5angel]

Attn: Newb


Please stop just assuming things and being so negative!

[Reggie1]

Like it or not, the policies of George Bush have helped distroy this nation in almost every single way.

I didn't realize we were destroyed. So should I stop paying my taxes now?
:D

Since the USA is now officially destroyed, I would like to take this time to formally declare Texas a sovereign nation (again).

[MonkeySlap Too]

Hey NewB, I hate to break to you - but FDR ran as a 'free market' kinds guy, in response to Hoover giving out special loans to keep businesses afloat (and therefore jobs). His 'New Deal' was a critical mistake the extended the length of the deppression a good deal longer than it needed to be.

FDR admired "uncle" Joe Stalin, one of the greatest mass-murderers in history. As bad or worse than Hitler, only Hitler was a problem first, so he got our attention. FDR also had a soviet spy as VP - Wallace. Wallace then ran as a 'progressive party' candidate... Which makes me really laugh when the left has adopted the phrase 'progressive' instead of 'liberal'. As if creeping socialism is in any way progressive.

Creating a global economy has good prospects for improving everyones life, a better chance than anything we humans have come up with yet. Could there be better options? I would think so, as there is a significant amount of waste involved in our system. But sometimes you work with what you have.

[ZIM]

Originally posted by red5angel

What's your career exactly? Are you running for office somewhere with the intent to work your way up to President of the US so you can fix the place? :rolleyes:
He's a Political Kommissar for the LaRouche people, R5A. See here. (http://forum.kungfumagazine.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=32732)

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
Hey NewB, I hate to break to you - but FDR ran as a 'free market' kinds guy, in response to Hoover giving out special loans to keep businesses afloat (and therefore jobs). His 'New Deal' was a critical mistake the extended the length of the deppression a good deal longer than it needed to be.

FDR admired "uncle" Joe Stalin, one of the greatest mass-murderers in history. As bad or worse than Hitler, only Hitler was a problem first, so he got our attention. FDR also had a soviet spy as VP - Wallace. Wallace then ran as a 'progressive party' candidate... Which makes me really laugh when the left has adopted the phrase 'progressive' instead of 'liberal'. As if creeping socialism is in any way progressive.




The new deal was absolutely crucial to developing and industrializing the USA, and there was absolutely no sign of recovery under the old system. FDRs new deal was required so our population wouldn't die. Do you realize that even over 50% of the USA didn't have electricity before the new deal?? Under FDR the USA was able to outproduce every nation and therefore was able to beat the Axis powers in world war 2. This is the same old line that college professors who hate FDR force down the throat of students, and is up to the same level of the lie that Abraham Lincoln had slaves.

[red5angel]

I see, things are becoming much more clear now. Newb doesn't support the war on terror, because he supports a terrorist organization:

http://www.justiceforjeremiah.com/


the madness starts to make some sense......

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
I see, things are becoming much more clear now. Newb doesn't support the war on terror, because he supports a terrorist organization:

http://www.justiceforjeremiah.com/


the madness starts to make some sense......

The real terrorist are the GW Bush Supporters whom some still think there are Weapons of Mass Distruction, and that hundreds of thousands of dead civilians are OK. Although all investigations done (and on the request of the British there was more than 1) showed absolutely no involvement. If the LaRouche movement is strong enough to brainwash people to run into the street and kill themselves, then all we have to do is un-brainwash bush and brainwash him, or put on 1 national broadcasted TV and brainwash everyone! Anyways, if you believe the LaRouche Youth Movement does have those kinds of powers (who is paranoid now), then you'd better join us since we're obviously going to win.


However, your support fo the Bush policies have killed hundreds of thousand innocent civilians and has cost hundreds of billions of dollars which could have been used to save the lives of countless more people. Like Stalin said, "Kill 1 person and it's a tragedy, kill a million people and it's a statistic."

Why do you support policies that have killed hundreds of thousands of people? Can you answer that question?

[red5angel]

suddenly the picture of you on the soapbox becomes more clear newb. You're cover has been sprung. Visiting the kungfuforums for new recruits are we?


then you'd better join us since we're obviously going to win.


more assumptions.....

[Reggie1]

Originally posted by Newb
whom some still think there are Weapons of Mass Distruction,



Bush policies have killed hundreds of thousand innocent civilians

Do you have proof of either of these? If it's not too much to ask I'd like to see more than one website validating these claims. A reputable website would be even better.

[red5angel]

This reminds of a little place near where I used to live. It was called "Arise!", it was in this quirky red stylized font and even included the exclamation point at the end of the word. On any given day you could walk by and usually the bicycle racks would sport several very old and well used bikes, and there was inevitably a car or two (ironically very old cars) covered in propoganda style bumper stickers about hemp, the evils of humanity and government and probably a rain forest or saving a whale thrown in there for good measure.
We'd sit at a freinds house next to this building and watch kids - almost inevitably college age kids, but some adults who were having a hard time letting go of that period in their lives - mill about in and outside the building with thier hemp tote bags, sandals, dredlocks and so on. most of them spent alot of the time getting rild up about this or that political issue, then they would head inside to do their research. We got curious one day so walked over and went inside. It was a small place, two rooms and a restroom, but both rooms were filled to the brim with "research material" for those preparing to protest. at that time they were phasing out all the old classic causes (see list of bumper stickers above) for all the new causes. I noticed consistanly as we browsed through these books that they all swung in a very definite direction.
My own personal theory has been that you always examine all sides of an issue before you really come to an understanding of it. they obviously didn't feel the same way at Arise!

Eventualy I was approached by a skinny man in dredlocks and sandals (seriously) who asked if I needed help with anything. I said I was just looking, curious and mentioned that it seemed the material they had was awefully one sided on the issues. He remained calm, really didn't bat an eye, and commented that they at Arise! felt that most public media was contaminated by the government way of thinking. Most of the material you coud get on a subject was in accurate and highly affected by what "they" (he never explained to me who "they" really were) wanted you to see, hear and think.
In the corner two women were arguing whether they should take a backpacking trip through the middle east to fight for women's rights - a noble enough cause, but I would have liked to have met up with them on their third day backpacking through the wonderful and scenic middleeast.

Regardless, we walked out having a stronger sense of what sort of place it was. It's still there, apparently alot of those kids could barely support themselves but they didn't have an issue making sure Arise! continued to exist in whatever form it chose to take.

[MonkeySlap Too]

NewB, you've got it horribly wrong. I don't deny that some social programs, and incentives for programs that benefit all (education, infrastructure, courts, common defense, etc) are good things. As much as I appreciate the IDEA of libertarianism, I don't think there is enough evidence show it is a wise thing. It is a fact that the creation of the 'middle class' in America is the result of three or four distinct policies where the government stood out of the way of people making their own way. FDR's raw deal caused the depression to continue much longer than it needed too. It was similar steps abroad that helped feed this, and the slow realization that we lived in a gllobal economy. There is considerable evidence that the Japanese didn't attack us to provoke a war, but to punish us for cuttiing off trade with them. They needed our resources to wage war.

I've seen what heavy social programs do to a country. I do think we have some work to do here, particularly in our treatment of the elderly, and the serfdom created by property taxes. However, the failed socialist-style government is not something to aspire too.

Lyndon Larouche is a wanna-be and never will be. He just isn't that bright.

[Newb]

Originally posted by Reggie1
Do you have proof of either of these? If it's not too much to ask I'd like to see more than one website validating these claims. A reputable website would be even better.


you don't need CNN to see if people still believe there are WMDs in Iraq. I personally have spoken to people i've met on the streets in southern and northern california, as well as Washington DC. There are Conservatives who still think there are or were WMDs. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but if you don't realize that people STILL believe the lies about WMD (talk about mass media brainwashing eh?) just go speak to people. Speak to 10 conservatives. You'll see it yourself.

As far as the dead body counts, it was over 10,000 withen the first parts of the war (Shock and Awe with multi kiloton bombs) had killed scores of people. A independant query was done into the deaths of civilians, and it ranged them in the hundreds of thousands. However, at what point does it not become acceptable? Is it not acceptable if we kill 10,000 innocent civilians? Is it not acceptable if we kill 100,000? How about if we kill more people than Saddam, then is it not acceptable (we might have already)? Let's just say only 1 innocent civilian was killed but we were completely wrong about Iraq being a threat to the USA with weapons of mass distruction. Is it then acceptable?

[red5angel]

I personally have spoken to people

what will it take to get you to stop using yourself as a reference for your arguments?

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
what will it take to get you to stop using yourself as a reference for your arguments?


If I am refrencing something like '**** cheney lied to get us into this war, or he is very senile' I will not use myself as a source. I never even met the man or talked to him. However, If it's a simple moot point, that people still today believe there are WMDs, and I personally have done the work to see, then yes, I will gladly use myself as a refrence. It's stupid to believe otherwise anyways. People believe all kinds of stupid things. I know a fair amount of people who are Republicans (hell even my liberal friend) beleive there are still WMDs. I will take it further and say many people (libs, dems, repubs, black, white, etc.) believe WMDs exist. If it's that important for you, just go ask 10 people. I've spoken to hundreds and found a good share.

[Nick Forrer]

Originally posted by Reggie1
Do you have proof of either of these? If it's not too much to ask I'd like to see more than one website validating these claims. A reputable website would be even better.

The 100,000 civilian death figure comes from 'the Lancet' the premier British based medical journal.

[ZIM]

Originally posted by red5angel
what will it take to get you to stop using yourself as a reference for your arguments? Its all "P because I said so, and P logically includes Q"

Whatever. No time for this right now. L8r.

yo, red- full box.

[Newb]

Originally posted by ZIM
Its all "P because I said so, and P logically includes Q"

Whatever. No time for this right now. L8r.

yo, red- full box.

That's **** cheney logic. Where are the Weapons of Mass Distruction? Yellow Cake. Muhommad Atta connection. Iraqis will treat us as liberators. We only need 25,000-50,000 troops to secure Iraq. The Iraq war will pay for itself through oil.

The list of "P because I said so, and P logically includes Q" from this administration has been all wrong.

[Newb]

Originally posted by MonkeySlap Too
NewB, you've got it horribly wrong. I don't deny that some social programs, and incentives for programs that benefit all (education, infrastructure, courts, common defense, etc) are good things. As much as I appreciate the IDEA of libertarianism, I don't think there is enough evidence show it is a wise thing. It is a fact that the creation of the 'middle class' in America is the result of three or four distinct policies where the government stood out of the way of people making their own way. FDR's raw deal caused the depression to continue much longer than it needed too. It was similar steps abroad that helped feed this, and the slow realization that we lived in a gllobal economy. There is considerable evidence that the Japanese didn't attack us to provoke a war, but to punish us for cuttiing off trade with them. They needed our resources to wage war.

I've seen what heavy social programs do to a country. I do think we have some work to do here, particularly in our treatment of the elderly, and the serfdom created by property taxes. However, the failed socialist-style government is not something to aspire too.

Lyndon Larouche is a wanna-be and never will be. He just isn't that bright.


Ok, let's take this step by step then. How did FDRs 'new deal' prolong the depression, and what policies would have built up the USA to fight fascism that waged in Europe in world war 2, as well as increase the living standards like FDRs new deal did?

How would you or the policies you propose brought electricity to the USA? Over 50% of the USA did not have electricity because free trade economics allowed power companies not to draw out power cables to rural areas since it cost too much. We need electricity before we could have a good recovery, so how would you have delt with that first? FDR is heavily slandered, and the policies of the bankers who caused the depressoin to begin with, we're making things worse and worse every single day. You don't go go back to the bankers who caused the depressoin for a recovery. It's like going back to the prostetute that give you syphillus for a cure (Edit: I didn't mean give you personally syphillius, I ment in general speaking terms).

[mortal]

If one innocent person was killed it's alright with me.lolo
What about when dictators and scumbags kill innocents. I NEVER hear liberals complain about that. EVER.

This is probably going to **** some of you off. But I heard a liberal say "republicans think American life is more valuable than anyones elses."

I couldn't agree more!

[Newb]

Originally posted by mortal
If one innocent person was killed it's alright with me.lolo
What about when dictators and scumbags kill innocents. I NEVER hear liberals complain about that. EVER.

This is probably going to **** some of you off. But I heard a liberal say "republicans think American life is more valuable than anyones elses."

I couldn't agree more!


I was complaining when the USA was selling banned weapons to saddam hussein when he was our ally. I was complaining when the USA fully supported the drug running Mujahadeen of Afghanistan with weapons for drug money. I also complained when the afghan war ended with Russia the USA did nothing except tell the warlords they can keep the money. I was complaining when the USA was funding Iran and Iraq with just enough weapons to make sure the most amount of people died as we played both sides. Who'se life do you think is more valuable? Yours as an American, or Albert Einstein?

[red5angel]

I will take it further and say many people (libs, dems, repubs, black, white, etc.) believe WMDs exist.

that's because your a presumptuous ass.


Where are the Weapons of Mass Distruction?

is this the sole basis for your argument? you keep saying it over and over and over and over and over again. None of us have denied that they do not exist so move on.


"republicans think American life is more valuable than anyones elses."

to me it is, why? Because I'm an american, its simple survival. i'd love to live in a world where everyone got along but it ain't gonna happen.



What about when dictators and scumbags kill innocents.

good question mortal, however this question is never addressed by people like newb. They have no real answer for what to do with guys who are actually perpetrating the crimes newb is screaming about. No one cares about the warlords all over africa committing genocide, or the dictators in the middle east doing the same. I'm starting to believe it's just jealousy, because america can do something about it. They chose to act as well in our self interest and I'm ok with that. That's how survival works.

[red5angel]

Attention Sgt. Zim! My inbox is clean.....

[ZIM]

Originally posted by red5angel
Attention Sgt. Zim! My inbox is clean..... Cool, but I gotta run right now. L8r, really.

[Newb]

Originally posted by ZIM
Cool, but I gotta run right now. L8r, really.
What about when dictators and scumbags kill innocents.


Many of those dictators are doing it using US Weapons and support. Pinochet for example, was a US Henry Kissinger puppet. Saddam Hussein had the political weight and the weapons to do what he did, when he was an Ally of the USA. We provided him the weapons to do what he did. We have to take responsibility for that, for our own crimes in the 1980s and onward. The Africa conflicts are fought with US and British weapons and intrest in the diamond, gold, and other goods in Africa. Do note that almost all of the natural resources such as Gold and Diamond in Africa belong to the British. They have no problem in starting wars. Furthermore, there are many bad leaders in the world, many dictators and monarchys too. What do you recommend we do? Do we go in and bomb all of them like we did to Iraq? The USA doesn't have that capability no matter how much u like to think with our smart bombs we can do almost anything. Millitary intervention in Iraq was the wrong thing to do. We had the UN all over Iraq. Saddam couldn't do a **** thing, and we pulled them out since they didn't find weapons of mass distruction. Oh the Irony.

We pul the UN out of Iraq when they had our old ally saddam fully cornered, who didn't have weapons of mass distruction, and let Kim Jong Il kick out the UN from Norht Korea who has claimed to have weapons of mass distruction. Regime change begins at home. Send the village idiot back to Texas.

[FuXnDajenariht]

"dude....the sky is blue..."


"no its not, your a liar! i want proof!"

:rolleyes:

[red5angel]

Many of those dictators are doing it using US Weapons and support

This is the way it will always fukking be. Guys like you thnk it's all too simple to figure out the worlds problems. It cracks me up to think you have all the answers. Like no one else in the world, in power to do something about it has not thought of the same things you have. :rolleyes: Instead you stumble blindly through some sort of iduyllic rhetoric, trying to convince people that that is the way it should be with no clue as to how it all really works.


We have to take responsibility for that,

we did, or did you miss the part where he is no longer in power?


Do we go in and bomb all of them like we did to Iraq?

ever heard of the saying "you have to break a few eggs to bake a cake"?


We pul the UN out

As it should be the UN has become defunct and worthless. It's a lot of politicians sitting around *****ing and not gettinga whole lot done. I say it should be disolved.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
This is the way it will always fukking be. Guys like you thnk it's all too simple to figure out the worlds problems. It cracks me up to think you have all the answers. Like no one else in the world, in power to do something about it has not thought of the same things you have. :rolleyes: Instead you stumble blindly through some sort of iduyllic rhetoric, trying to convince people that that is the way it should be with no clue as to how it all really works.


Then how did Iraq get all those US Weapons when he was meeting with Donald Rumsfeld in the 1980s after our ally gassed the kurds?



ever heard of the saying "you have to break a few eggs to bake a cake"?

So what does that mean? What do we do about all of the dictatorships in the world?



As it should be the UN has become defunct and worthless. It's a lot of politicians sitting around *****ing and not gettinga whole lot done. I say it should be disolved. [/B]

Well that's kind of odd since the David Kay and Dueffler report both showed that the UN Sanctions were working just fine. Saddam didn't have weapons of mass distruction, like the UN proved but Bush didnt' believe. Iraq lost their capability thanks to the UN intervention, and if Bush didn't kick out the UN from Iraq for not finding weapons of mass distruction (the reason we went to war), we would be $200 Billion dollars richer, thousands less troops would be maimed or dead, and uncountable iraqi civilians would be alive. So since the UN sanctions were working, and the UN was right, Iraq didn't have WMD; and George Bush was wrong, how is that the UNs fault?

[mortal]

That is another typical complaint. We support scumbags and the like. When it serves our purpose we do. So what? In time we regret it. **** happens. Haven't you ever been friends with someone and have them stab you in the back. A liberal would say your wrong for being friends. I would say the guy that backstabbed was wrong.

The whole world is going kicking and screaming towards western democracy(one of the most succesful ways of life in history). There is more to our system then what you put your liberal spotlight on. People like you are another reason the world hates the US.

I don't think a more accomplished Americans life is more valuable than mine. Or that a more intelligent persons vote is worth more than mine.
Those are elitist liberal veiws.

[red5angel]

Then how did Iraq get all those US Weapons when he was meeting with Donald Rumsfeld in the 1980s after our ally gassed the kurds?

how the hell is that a response to the quote you took from me?


So what does that mean? What do we do about all of the dictatorships in the world?

Things don't change on their own. I'm not sure where the confusion is on that statement so I'm not going to bother to explain, you need the work on reading comprehension anyway.


Well that's kind of odd since the David Kay and Dueffler report both showed that the UN Sanctions were working just fine.

curious, thats why the UN inspectors kept getting kicked out of Iraq, kept getting denied access to certain facilities? That's also why severl key pieces of equipment still have not been located in Iraq? The problem with the WMD defense that guys like you and your terrorist freinds don't get is that it's extremely short sighted to say that since he didn't have them he never would. He'd had them before. LOL@ Iraq losing their capability, you need to do more research.

[Newb]

Originally posted by mortal
That is another typical complaint. We support scumbags and the like. When it serves our purpose we do. So what? In time we regret it. **** happens. Haven't you ever been friends with someone and have them stab you in the back. A liberal would say your wrong for being friends. I would say the guy that backstabbed was wrong.

So when did Saddam stab us in the back?



The whole world is going kicking and screaming towards western democracy(one of the most succesful ways of life in history). There is more to our system then what you put your liberal spotlight on. People like you are another reason the world hates the US.

So you don't think it's the economic policy that has the 3rd world working for almost slave labor wages, and our war on Iraq which was based on the fraud of weapons of mass distruction which were never there, our disregard for international law, the torture in Abu Ghriab, and the tons of innocent civilians killed. Nay, it's my fault.


[b]
I don't think a more accomplished Americans life is more valuable than mine. Or that a more intelligent persons vote is worth more than mine.
Those are elitist liberal veiws.

So you wouldn't take a bullet for President Bush (not that he's more intellegent than you) or or Benjamin Franklin in the American Revolution? Would that make you a elitest Liberal if you were to value Franklins life more than yours?

[red5angel]

So you don't think it's the economic policy that has the 3rd world working for almost slave labor wages, and our war on Iraq which was based on the fraud of weapons of mass distruction which were never there, our disregard for international law, the torture in Abu Ghriab, and the tons of innocent civilians killed. Nay, it's my fault.

So it's Americas fault there are third world countries?


GET OFF THE WEPOANS OF MASS DESTRUCTION YOU ASS. Fukk, how many times do you have to repeat it and for us to have to repeat to you it wasn't the only fukking reason. It's just like a fanatical lunatic to keep drilling on about the same points cause you got nothing else.

[Newb]

Originally posted by red5angel
So it's Americas fault there are third world countries?


To a large degree, yes, the policies of the USA after Richard Nixon when we went off the Bretton Woods system to a deregulated floating exchange rate system. Under bad presidents such as Carter and Nixon, the policies that were embedded in the Constitution to defend nations from being looted by more powerful nations were distroyed, and it was free reign. Yes, powerful financeers in the USA such as George Shultz, George Soros, the democrat Felix Rohatyn and others do manipulate the free markets and loot nations of their wealth.



GET OFF THE WEPOANS OF MASS DESTRUCTION YOU ASS. Fukk, how many times do you have to repeat it and for us to have to repeat to you it wasn't the only fukking reason. It's just like a fanatical lunatic to keep drilling on about the same points cause you got nothing else.

That was the justification for war. That is what the people of the USA were bombarded with 24/7 with people like **** Cheney using information that was fraudulant. You are not helping the US by ignoring this Red. That is why Congress authorized the war. Congress DIDN'T authorize the war so we can simply just get rid of Saddam Hussein, there were other ways of doing it that wouldn't ahve cost this much or resulted in this much death. The UN was right, there were no weapons of mass distruction. Saddam didn't pose an imminent threat to us. We were more likely to be invaded by the moon than from Iraq, and now, we are stuck in a quagmire. Can you tell me what the reason for going to war was if it wasn't weapons of mass distruction, and if you can't, then who'se the ass?

[red5angel]

That was the justification for war

Let me correct this for you: "that was part of the justification for war."

[mortal]

He was defying sanctions. We passed numerous resolutions that said he had to comply. The impotent UN members were content with his continued defiance. Mainly because they were making millions off the oil for food scandal. Left wing people are never mad over all the people that starved to death under sadam. Or the fact that these jerks from the UN got rich at the same time.
It doesn't matter wether he had them or not. He bluffed and we called it. That is it.

[red5angel]

Mainly because they were making millions off the oil for food scandal.


oops! you spilled the secret mortal ;)

[FuXnDajenariht]

PRROOF!


******!

[Newb]

Originally posted by mortal
He was defying sanctions. We passed numerous resolutions that said he had to comply. The impotent UN members were content with his continued defiance.

Would you care to explain then, how the UN sanctions were working and that Saddams WMD capabilities diminised under the UN programs?



Mainly because they were making millions off the oil for food scandal. Left wing people are never mad over all the people that starved to death under sadam.

Too bad the Dueffler report shows that American companies were involved in the Oil for food scandal.

Privacy Act, Order Shielded U.S. Names on List
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16201-2004Oct7.html


The one company that helped Saddam exploit the oil-for-food program in the mid-1990s that wasn't identified in Duelfer's report was Halliburton, and the person at the helm of Halliburton at the time of the scheme was Vice President **** Cheney. Halliburton and its subsidiaries were one of several American and foreign oil supply companies that helped Iraq increase its crude exports from $4 billion in 1997 to nearly $18 billion in 2000 by skirting U.S. laws and selling Iraq spare parts so it could repair its oil fields and pump more oil. Since the oil-for-food program began, Iraq has sold $40 billion worth of oil. U.S. and European officials have long argued that the increase in Iraq's oil production also expanded Saddam's ability to use some of that money for weapons, luxury goods and palaces. Security Council diplomats estimate that Iraq was skimming off as much as 10 percent of the proceeds from the oil-for-food program thanks to companies like Halliburton and former executives such as Cheney.

U.N. documents show that Halliburton's affiliates have had controversial dealings with the Iraqi regime during Cheney's tenure at the company and played a part in helping Saddam Hussein illegally pocket billions of dollars under the U.N.'s oil-for-food program. The Clinton administration blocked one deal Halliburton was trying to push through sale because it was "not authorized under the oil-for-food deal," according to U.N. documents. That deal, between Halliburton subsidiary Ingersoll Dresser Pump Co. and Iraq, included agreements by the firm to sell nearly $1 million in spare parts, compressors and firefighting equipment to refurbish an offshore oil terminal, Khor al Amaya. Still, Halliburton used one of foreign
subsidiaries to sell Iraq the equipment it needed so the country could pump more oil, according to a report in the Washington Post in June 2001.

The Halliburton subsidiaries, Dresser-Rand and Ingersoll Dresser Pump Co., sold water and sewage treatment pumps, spare parts for oil facilities and pipeline equipment to Baghdad through French affiliates from the first half of 1997 to the summer of 2000, U.N. records show. Ingersoll Dresser Pump also signed contracts -- later blocked by the United States -- according to the Post, to help repair an Iraqi oil terminal that U.S.-led military forces destroyed in the Gulf War years earlier.

Cheney's hard-line stance against Iraq on the campaign trail is hypocritical considering that during his tenure as chief executive of Halliburton, Cheney pushed the U.N. Security Council, after he became CEO to end an 11-year embargo on sales of civilian goods, including oil related equipment, to Iraq. Cheney has said sanctions against countries like Iraq unfairly punish U.S. companies.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, Cheney adamantly denied that under his leadership, Halliburton did business with Iraq. While he acknowledged that his company did business with Libya and Iran through foreign subsidiaries, Cheney said, "Iraq's different." He claimed that he imposed a "firm policy" prohibiting any unit of Halliburton against trading with Iraq.

"I had a firm policy that we wouldn't do anything in Iraq, even arrangements that were supposedly legal," Cheney said on the ABC-TV news program "This Week" on July 30, 2000. "We've not done any business in Iraq since U.N. sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990,
and I had a standing policy that I wouldn't do that."

But Cheney's denials don't hold up. Halliburton played a major role in helping Iraq repair its oil fields during the mid-1990s that allowed Saddam to siphon off funds from the oil-for-food program to fund a weapons program, which Cheney and President Bush insist was
the case.

As secretary of defense in the first Bush administration, Cheney helped to lead a multinational coalition against Iraq in the Persian Gulf War and to devise a comprehensive economic embargo to isolate Saddam Hussein's government. After Cheney was named chief executive of Halliburton in 1995, he promised to maintain a hard line against Baghdad.

But that changed when it appeared that Halliburton was headed for a financial crisis in the mid-1990s. Cheney said sanctions against countries like Iraq were hurting corporations such as Halliburton.




Or the fact that these jerks from the UN got rich at the same time.
It doesn't matter wether he had them or not. He bluffed and we called it. That is it.

what bluff? Saddam stated he distroyed all of his WMD, showed the UN with unfettered access, and the UN was verifying it. The only bluff was comming from teh Bush admin for 'weapons of mass distruction'

[MoreMisfortune]

Mass graves for the pump and the price is set, and the price is set
Mass graves for the pump and the price is set, and the price is set
Mass graves for the pump and the price is set, and the price is set
Mass graves for the pump and the price is set, and the price is set

Who controls the past now controls the future
Who controls the present now controls the past
Who controls the past now controls the future
Who controls the present now?

[red5angel]

Who controls the past now controls the future

That's the key now isn't it.

[mortal]

"what bluff? Saddam stated he distroyed all of his WMD, showed the UN with unfettered access, and the UN was verifying it. The only bluff was comming from teh Bush admin for 'weapons of mass distruction'"

He blocked them at every turn. Are you serious?

"halliburton blah blah blah"

That is all I read.

Oh I forgot Bush made the whole thing up so he could mount Sadams head on the wall in his macho safari room. What do you get for a guy that has everything?

Did you ever think Sadam had the weapons and snuck them, out to another **** eating middle east country who hates the US before we kicked their evil doing asses?