How can Americans let this happen?

[morgoth]

What am I talking about?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/27/congress.terrorism.ap/index.html

This is a disgrace. The US, for a long while, has not been a democracy, but this is the nail in the coffin. Basically, the US government can now legally detain people, torture them, refuse them the right to challenge their detention, refuse them the right to challenge the government for damages whilst being held in detention etc. Add your disgraceful Patriot Act, and Bush Jr.s authorised NSA spying etc with AT &T and your country's government is a true disgrace. Your congress is a disgrace. And the people, are a disagrace, for not standing for what is right, and standing against what is wrong. Oops, I forgot, you can't have rallies against government policies, that's against the US and a terrorist act now under Bush's regime. Bush is another Hitler. Be warned.

I'm saddened that this pathetic section of legislation has been passed, and will be complaining to my local MP for her to bring this up in parliament, and for Australia to sever all poltitical ties with the US, based on these legislation contravening various parts of the United Nations Charters of Human Rights, and the Geneva Conventions. I suggest other Australians do the same.

Bush is a lying, idiotic hypocrite.

Dave

[sammil]

Dave,

You're right in every instance. I've lost track of the transgressions. The only hope is the coming elections. There are signs of a humongous reaction. Even in Kansas where I live... :)

(They actually voted out all but one of the school board people that okayed the biblical interpretation of evolution.)

[Lavene]

Haven't you heard? There is a beareded little man in Afghanistan (maybe) that (possibly) plan to kill every american (and surly the British too... probably) with the help of a huge worldwide (yet entirely invisible) terrorist network.

And they have all this terrible weapons (we think) like simple bombs made of readily available liquids (no scientist has yet managed to explain just how this is possible though), first rate hackers to attack all military and civilian networks (we assume) and quite possible laods of nasty genetically engineered stuff to destry all our food (uh... yea).

So be afraid... be very afraid! Because this is dangerous!! Much more dangerous than the fact that your psycotic nabour has the house full of guns, no one bothers to try to minimize the risks of natural disasters, that the air you breathe is getting more and more toxic... but never mind this; because a little bearded man in Afgahnistan (probably) want's to kill you.

Tina

[lurch]

Dave, Good to see you still stiring the pot. Mike Moore's film on 9/11 certainly showed Bush to be a dangerous buffoon. I agree with your sentiments.

Our Federal Government in Oz has nothing to boast about either with it's anti-terroist legislation. Security was already tight in April 2005 when I flew into Sydney after a month visiting family in Chile. No problems in Chile but I was questioned by an International Police Officer soon after arrival in Sydney. I was then questioned by two Customs Security Officers while I waited for my baggage to appear. At that point I asked if there were an alert out on middle aged men with white hair, a comment that was not well received. Finally, while having my luggage examined by a third Customs officer, he spotted a Chilean daily newspaper. In an accusative tone I was asked "who is that for?" I replied that it was for me and that I read Spanish. I was then welcomed back into the country. If it had been 20 years earlier I might have been body searched as I more closely resembled those bearded people which preoccupy Bush and Co. I think we need Mike Moore to make a film in Oz.

Phillip.

[benjaminq]

Hm a recent survey in Germany gave as a result that only 38% of the people in eastern Germany believe that the german democracy (in its current state I may add) is a good system. Think of that! 62% of eastern Germany would rather return to something different than a democracy!

It might sound hard, but I utterly hope that I can help raising a big wall in case they start to return to some non-democratic regime ...

Then look at the silent majority of people that simply do not go to the elections any more. If you made a party out of them here in Germany they would be the stongest party!

Democracy has a big problem: politicians are not acting in favour of the country and the people as such, but they are acting to preserve their power. Thus, they do not take the measures necessary (and somewhat painful) that have to be taken to adapt their country and people to the coming problems (over-ageing, world market pressure, global warming, energy and water problems). They think in 4 year circles and avoid to do anything in the last year to not cause any lobby to be burdened.

In the US, IMHO the situation is not so different. Its the dirty game of power and money, and the rest of the people live an a parallel universe. They are there for paying taxes, not to ask questions. They have to work hard, to pay their taxes. China makes consuming cheap and every poor taxpayer has his comfort, as long as he is comfortable he won't ask too many questions.

Questions like: does this Hyundai kill a job at Chevrolet? Does H&M give the sewer around the corner a job? When it comes to consuming, most of us are globalistic capitalists, asking for the price and not for the conditions under which the product was crafted. European products come with the price of social benefits, Chinas products do not have this "social tax".

The election of the political system is made in the stores not at the voting box.

Benjamin

[danieldk]

I lost my trust in politics. I couldn't imagine that it happened this fast. Most illusions are shattered. One vote of (in our country) say 10 million people does not mean a thing, and the result is that a group of 150 people have the greatest political power for four years.

Fortunately, there are a lot of good things that can potentially change things, like free software, all kinds of non-profits, and good people.

Spread love in society.

[fos]

I agree and I live in the US. I haven't met a politician yet that I would want to be friends with. One of the problems with politics is the fact that we now have "professional" politicians, usually lawyers. :( The US congress was originally intended to be composed of mostly citizens that met occaisionally and went back home. We now have individuals that sit in congress, courts, or administrative positions and have enormous power, and control incredible sums of money.

As for me, I'm for less government. One that protects our borders, provides for defense, and provides services that only a central government can provide. The very things that were set out in our original constitution.

BTW, a small number of votes can swing an election. I always exercise my right to vote. My father fought in two wars and retired from the Navy. One of my sons is in the 101st Airborne and just completed a second tour in Iraq. He likes politics even less than I do.

fos....

[morgoth]

Dave, Good to see you still stiring the pot. Mike Moore's film on 9/11 certainly showed Bush to be a dangerous buffoon. I agree with your sentiments.

Our Federal Government in Oz has nothing to boast about either with it's anti-terroist legislation. Security was already tight in April 2005 when I flew into Sydney after a month visiting family in Chile. No problems in Chile but I was questioned by an International Police Officer soon after arrival in Sydney. I was then questioned by two Customs Security Officers while I waited for my baggage to appear. At that point I asked if there were an alert out on middle aged men with white hair, a comment that was not well received. Finally, while having my luggage examined by a third Customs officer, he spotted a Chilean daily newspaper. In an accusative tone I was asked "who is that for?" I replied that it was for me and that I read Spanish. I was then welcomed back into the country. If it had been 20 years earlier I might have been body searched as I more closely resembled those bearded people which preoccupy Bush and Co. I think we need Mike Moore to make a film in Oz.

Phillip.

I haven't seen the Mike Moore film, but good on him. He threw some shit at the current US regime (yes, folks, it's a regime) and some of it stuck.

I too got handsearched 2 years ago when flying to my parents place in QLD, both on the way up, and the way down. Was a simple hand search, wasn't pulled aside or questioned. If they'd done that, I'd have refused to answer any questions and would have asked that they arrange for a public lawyer to be available before further questioning me. I'm sick and tired of governments ignoring the voice of the people (vox populi) and doing what THEY want, damned be the public. I'd rather let the terrorists win than give up my freedoms.

Dave

[morgoth]

Haven't you heard? There is a beareded little man in Afghanistan (maybe) that (possibly) plan to kill every american (and surly the British too... probably) with the help of a huge worldwide (yet entirely invisible) terrorist network.

And they have all this terrible weapons (we think) like simple bombs made of readily available liquids (no scientist has yet managed to explain just how this is possible though), first rate hackers to attack all military and civilian networks (we assume) and quite possible laods of nasty genetically engineered stuff to destry all our food (uh... yea).

So be afraid... be very afraid! Because this is dangerous!! Much more dangerous than the fact that your psycotic nabour has the house full of guns, no one bothers to try to minimize the risks of natural disasters, that the air you breathe is getting more and more toxic... but never mind this; because a little bearded man in Afgahnistan (probably) want's to kill you.

Tina

Lavene - I like your sarcasm :) It mirrors my sarcasm quite closely. It seems that the 'war against terror' is merely a front to enact further state powers to local governments, to further entrench their ability to dictate what, and what not the populace can do. This isn't democracy, it's an autocratic, beaueaucratic dictatorship.

Dave

[morgoth]

Democracy has a big problem: politicians are not acting in favour of the country and the people as such, but they are acting to preserve their power. Thus, they do not take the measures necessary (and somewhat painful) that have to be taken to adapt their country and people to the coming problems (over-ageing, world market pressure, global warming, energy and water problems). They think in 4 year circles and avoid to do anything in the last year to not cause any lobby to be burdened.

Absolutely. I'm glad you mentioned China, cos I've given this some thought. It wasn't that long ago when the US was absolutely blasting China for holding people in detention for preaching free speech, etc. Detainment without trial, without care, torture without concern, murder without concern. And now the US is doing the same thing (well has been for the past 4 years with Guantanamo Bay and other hidden prisons in other countries). Hypocrisy? Certainly.

Dave

[morgoth]

I agree and I live in the US. I haven't met a politician yet that I would want to be friends with. One of the problems with politics is the fact that we now have "professional" politicians, usually lawyers. :( The US congress was originally intended to be composed of mostly citizens that met occaisionally and went back home. We now have individuals that sit in congress, courts, or administrative positions and have enormous power, and control incredible sums of money.

As for me, I'm for less government. One that protects our borders, provides for defense, and provides services that only a central government can provide. The very things that were set out in our original constitution.

BTW, a small number of votes can swing an election. I always exercise my right to vote. My father fought in two wars and retired from the Navy. One of my sons is in the 101st Airborne and just completed a second tour in Iraq. He likes politics even less than I do.

fos....

I [at least I think I do] hear you FOS. If I understand correctly, you would rather the US government concentrate on the problems at hand at home, than the world's problems, correct?

It's going to be very interesting what my local MP says when I start quoting the UN charter of human rights, and relevant parts of the Geneva convention, and that fact that one of our strongest political and economical allies (the US) is breaking these. Do we care more about democracy in this country, or money (as I suspect)? I want to see the bitch squirm. I want her to push in parliament for a Senate inquiry into our political and financial ties with the US given the fact that the US is breaking the UN charters and Geneva conventions. I want her to ask for us to remove ourselves from the UN in protest at the breach of human rights that the current US government is doing (and encourage other governments to do the same). I want her to remove the Australian signataries from the Geneva conventions as we are not abiding by them unless we take action (both political and financial) against the US for failing to abide by them. Of course, I know that nothing will ever happen. I'm only dreaming of what is right, and what should happen. I'm very tempted to start my own political party, the main issue is that it would be blocked by the current government. I'd call it the PFTD (People For True Democracy) party. Another issue is enough followers to actually create enough votes to make a difference. For it to work, it would need a major player in every electorate. We'd need to sit down and agree on set strategies and policies, and we'd need to stay firm. I don't want a political party like the democrats, which was originally founded to do the same, but over time became filled with the same type of politicians as the main political parties. Sadly, the cost of doing something is beyond me, I cannot afford to make flights to other cities, both financially and timewise. I know what needs to be done, but I lack the ability to do it.

I personally would like to see the GPL v3 include a clause that military is forbidden from using free software. Period. And that any governmental use of free software MUST be publically accounted for in every single instance.

Dave

[lurch]

Dave, you might be interested in the following Australian.

http://www.getup.org.au/

[Leon]

Quoth Morgoth:

"I want her to remove the Australian signataries from the Geneva conventions as we are not abiding by them unless we take action (both political and financial) against the US for failing to abide by them."

The US is not abiding by the Geneva Conventions because it IS granting the status of legitimacy to terrorists, who do not wear uniforms with distinctive national marking, nor carry a standard identification document.

[romac]

I suggest that taking the following steps might be useful in ending the
anti-Americanism which is currently rampant around the world and inside the
United States:

1. Withdraw from the United Nations and give that organization 30 days to
remove all its operations, staff and accredited diplomats from American
territory.

2. Withdraw from NATO.

3. Bring all American troops home within three months to bases on American
territory.

4. Withdraw from all foreign alliances, written or implied, including all
commitments, written or implied, to protect any foreign nations if they are
attacked, including Israel, Britain, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan.

5. Announce that we will remain neutral in any messes created in Europe,
Africa and Asia and leave it up to others to solve such problems.

6. Place tariffs as necessary to protect American industry from foreign
competition.

We tried most of these back in the 1930's and they worked wonders. It seems
to me if we did all these things now we would completely eliminate
anti-Americanism around the world.

[bhobjj]

What am I talking about?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/27/congress.terrorism.ap/index.html

This is a disgrace. The US, for a long while, has not been a democracy, but this is the nail in the coffin. Basically, the US government can now legally detain people, torture them, refuse them the right to challenge their detention, refuse them the right to challenge the government for damages whilst being held in detention etc.
Dave

Nothing new.

If you believe that you have ever had any civil rights in the USA, then I think that you have been watching too much television.

Many years ago, back in my college days, I had some run-ins with police.

I have had my face slammed into the hood of my car. Another time I had been forced to remove my jacket and stand outside for more than 1/2 hour in 20 degree F (-7 C), while the cop was sitting in his cruiser eating his lunch. Once, I was given a summons for "leaving the scene of an accident" for having a bent fender. When I went to court, and explained that I had bought the car in that conditions and I had owned it for several years. I had a photograph of the car from 2 years before. The judge said " I think that in this instance, we will give you the benefit of doubt. " He then went on and gave me a 5 minute lecture about properly reporting accidents to the police.

Another time, I was held in custody for 3 hours. Even way back in the 1970s, the police could hold a subject for questioning for 24 hours. I was not charged with anything. I was not allowed a phone call. They had also damaged my car towing it to the impound. When I was released, I went to the police impound to get my car returned. Sorry, it was after 5PM. The clerk will not be back until 9AM. So, I hitchhiked 45 miles (72 km) back to school and in the morning hitchhiked back to the impound yard. I got my car back. I had to pay out of my own pocket to repair the tailpipe and broken e-brake line.

Many years later, 400 miles away:
I was managing a department that employed 45 - 50 laborers. One of my foreman was clearly being harassed by the police and I got involved. A couple days later I had two detectives visit my house. They basically
said "You leave us alone and we will leave you alone."

I have never been charged with any crime other than traffic violations.

Unless you have buckets of money, you can forget about an attorney. They want to foster good relations with the local judges and police. I have tried several times.

This is ancient history and I have learned some lessons.

It kind of make me wonder. . .
Why would someone become a terrorist?

[bhobjj]

War on terrorists?

Terrorists are not specific people or groups of people. It describes a people engaging in a method of warfare. The USA military has the Navy Seals, the Army Rangers, and the Green Berets. The kid from your neighborhood who used to destroy mailboxes has grown up. They are called commandos.


OK terrorist. Here are you instructions:
We want to create as much chaos and confusion as possible in a city.
We have blueprints of all the industries and institutions.
We have gps tags of all the critical facilities.
First, disable all of the backup systems; standby generators, backup pumps, etc. Emergency services and hospital are the first priority.
Then disable all of the utilities; sewer, water, electric, gas, and communications.
The only communication that is almost impossible to disable is Ham radio.

[morgoth]

Quoth Morgoth:

"I want her to remove the Australian signataries from the Geneva conventions as we are not abiding by them unless we take action (both political and financial) against the US for failing to abide by them."

The US is not abiding by the Geneva Conventions because it IS granting the status of legitimacy to terrorists, who do not wear uniforms with distinctive national marking, nor carry a standard identification document.

That's Bullshit Leon - please, let the US announce the identities of EVERY single spy and under cover agent. Go on. I bet they won't, for the same reason as why terrorists don't openly show themselves.

Dave

[morgoth]

I suggest that taking the following steps might be useful in ending the
anti-Americanism which is currently rampant around the world and inside the
United States:

1. Withdraw from the United Nations and give that organization 30 days to
remove all its operations, staff and accredited diplomats from American
territory.

2. Withdraw from NATO.

3. Bring all American troops home within three months to bases on American
territory.

4. Withdraw from all foreign alliances, written or implied, including all
commitments, written or implied, to protect any foreign nations if they are
attacked, including Israel, Britain, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan.

5. Announce that we will remain neutral in any messes created in Europe,
Africa and Asia and leave it up to others to solve such problems.

6. Place tariffs as necessary to protect American industry from foreign
competition.

We tried most of these back in the 1930's and they worked wonders. It seems
to me if we did all these things now we would completely eliminate
anti-Americanism around the world.

Romac, can we have you sit for president and have you voted in pretty please. Best ideas I've heard. Contrary to your thoughts, the US isn't the world, the rest of the world doesn't hold its breath on hoping for US involvement. The rest of the world would be very happy with it all. As to point 6 - I have a simply answer to that - complete economic sanctions against the US - see how long your country would last. Your economy is already bursting and overburdened as is.

1. Tells me what most Americans seem to think - that they're bigger than the UN. I'll spell it out for you:

United Nations

Nations - plural, means more than one. There's another 300 odd state members, plenty to go around.

2. And?

3. Fine by me.

4. Fine by me. How about letting other countries look after their affairs? The US involvement in Iraq has done real wonders. Please note my sarcasm.

5. I think that's what Asia, Africa and Europe really want. But don't effect preferential trade treatment either. The US gets treated like any other country.

6. And? Two words (if needed):

Economic Sanctions

It's nice and easy isn't it. If people were worth more than the almighty dollar, we'd get somewhere in this very messed up world.

Dave

[morgoth]

Bob - I believe you about the lack of rights. Australia is no better. Big business and the almighty dollar are the most important things, we're just sheep fodder to pay for the rich and powerful. Without us, they cannot survive. They're like parasites and we're the poor suckers that get infected with their shit.

To some of the others that have posted in this thread:

Tell me - what would happen if 90% of the US population grew fed up with things and openly revolted against the government. Would they be marked terrorists, or would they be announcing their displeasure in the government? I bet the former, and I bet military powers would be placed to shoot on kill any dissenting people. That's a military regime I might add. if military action was taken to curb a revolt, wouldn't that be complete disregard to the constituents?

Someone else summed it up very nicely somewhere else in a post on Slashdot - once a upon a time, the US constitution was written for the average person, and those sitting in 'power' were average people, serving the average people. With the advent of capitalism, the people were forgotten, and now government serves business. Doesn't that really make you wonder? Or are some of you that blind to believe every single lie your government tells you?

Can you honestly tell me that David Hicks doesn't deserve a chance to legally fight his false imprisonment? Can you see real justice in a system that doesn't charge you, but imprisons you for as long as you like, with no evidence (or it's fabricated). UN delegates aren't allowed to visit, you're not allowed to have a private conversation, you're tortured, etc.

Our Australian Attorney General, the dishonourable Phillip Ruddock (wanker if ever I saw one) believes that sleep depravation isn't torture, and isn't a contravention of the Geneva convention. I say to all terrorists, please capture US soldiers and perform sleep depravation on them as to gather intelligence. After all, it's not torture. Of course, sleep depravation, as we all know, is torture. Given this type of legislation being passed by the current US regime, and the implicit lies being spread by all concerned, we just know that the US is torturing people. That makes things all fair in love and war, and if terrorists have to use any means to get their point across, so be it, the US isn't any better (neither is the Australian government for that matter). You reap what you sow. Bush Jr. has done more harm to the US than all combined presidents from 200 or so years. Think about that. Think about how many rights you've lost. Your founding fathers would be aghast at what your country is doing now. They would be deeply ashamed, and deeply ashamed to be Americans.

Dave

[romac]

Dave:

Thanks for not disappointing me - I knew I could get a rise out of you!

[bluesdog]

I should think this (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/092806D.shtml) would get a rise out of any US citizen..

[morgoth]

It really is good to see some Americans worried about the direction of your government and some of the laws that are being introduced. Don't get me wrong, Australia is no better, we've had certain anti terrorist laws now for nearly a year, most Australians polled that they were OK, despite glaring omissions of meeting various internatinal human rights charters. The majority of our populace is stupid and lazy. They believe whatever they're told because they lack the brains and ability to determine the truth for themselves, they'd rather have it all nice and easy and on a plate. This makes it especially easy for the populace to be spoonfed lies, cos the government knows that the majority will just accept it at face value, and those few that know it's a lie and challenge it are either crackpots or terrorist sympathisers. I ain't a crackpot, so I guess I must be a terrorist sympathiser then.

Dave

[danieldk]

I am kinda worried about how few Western governments still support the international charters. Most of them don't seem to care at all, and don't defend them. Effectively meaning that the charters are dead, except if the United Nations is able to uphold them effectively.

[morgoth]

Exactly. I'll give an example - Israel's recent invasion of Lebanon. Not only was this an illegal invasion, they bloody get away with it! Not only that, they get a lopsided gimme vote from the United Nations to have as many troops as they want, inside Lebanon, ie. a permanent invasion. That is not justice. And it is plainly not right. Now, we all know that the US secretly controls what the UN does, and we know that the US was lobbying for this resolution, and was also secretely supplying weapons to Israel during the height of the conflict. These weapons also include banned chemical warfare weapons. News of these chemical weapons has been kept quiet since about a day after the news was initially released. Why? Because the US media moguls control news outlets world wordwide, and they don't want this news to hit the ordinary populace and start making them think "hang on here, the US is supplying illegal and banned chemical warfare weapons to Israel".

However, it's not right for the USSR to supply weapons to Iran, or Lebanon, or Syria etc etc. They're 'destabilising' the region. What gives? It really does seem to my eyes that there's one rule for the US and a fuck you rule to the rest of the world (written by the US). Money dominates everything. I have a solid solution to this all:

1. Every other country band together and take full economic action against the US.

2. If the US threatens to remove software etc from these countries, forcefully sieze their software, reverse engineer it, copy it and ignore international copyright and trademark laws and keep on distributing it. Same with other non software materials.

I'd give the US 3 months before it totally collapsed. Then we'd get civil unrest, a huge change in government and political power, and then real negotiations could happen to ensure that the new US does things the right way and plays nice with the rest of the world. Whether it stays that way is a different story of course ;)

Dave

[krp]

Western countries support international charters and treaties only when there is an advantage to a particular western power.

Take the current yellowcake fiasco. The U.S. (my country) and some western European countries are hollering that Iran is in violation of the Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) by enriching uranium.

Well guess what, under the NPT any non-nuclear weapon state can enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. Enriched uranium is normally sold as reactor fuel. Happens all the time.

On the other hand guess what country is violating the NPT? If you guessed the U.S. you are correct. How? By 'loaning' nuclear weapons to NATO allies who are non-nuclear weapons states including Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey (based on a 2005 report).

As for the unbelievable and most certainly unconstitional bills being passed by this most sorrid Congress, if the Republican party maintains their majority in Congress after this upcoming election then (a) it shows the majority of Americans just don't give a damn, (b) the election was rigged or (c) all of the above.

[bluesdog]

Talking of unconstitutional bills.... (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9779) My expectations are dire, although this could simply be my own subjective impression, a mood that will pass. I can't help feeling, however, a sense of gathering dread, attached not just to the Military Commissions Act but arising out of the political atmosphere surrounding its passage. I never could understand – in the sense of share – the fear of authority that emanates from my Arab friend every time he sees someone in uniform. Now, however, I am beginning to feel it myself – as we all will.

[krp]

How very true.

[thoth]

Found this on the web a while ago, interesting concept or last resort

[morgoth]

hahaha Thoth - nice image. Sadly, getting rid of the USA isn't an answer, there are many good people in the US of A. They're not directly at fault for the mess that their government and policy makers leave. It's the government and policy that needs to go, not the people. The current democratic process in many countries does not encourage the populace to be pro-active in legislative decisions, but rather the opposite. The 'norm' is now that you vote on 2 or 3 major parties, nothing else is acceptable socially, it's socially programmed into the majority of people not to think. Most of the human populace are drones now - get up, go to work, come home and eat/play with offspring/relax, go to bed; rinse and repeat next day. Sad, but true. I'm glad I'm halfway through my life, cos I really don't want to see how bad society is going to get. And in the future, it's going to get very bad.

Dave

[morgoth]

Talking of unconstitutional bills.... (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9779)

Rather worrying, I agree. The main issue is that the normal average American believes the current propoganda. That means that any politicians who publically disagree with such unconstitutional bills are marked as terrorist sympathisers and their political careers are ended. Since most modern politicians are in it for the money and power, they want to prolong their career, not shorten it, even if it means doing the morally wrong thing. Worrying eh? This ties in again with what I was saying before - that the average person just doesn't want to get involved in political decision making these days, they just want someone else to deal with it. Whether they deal with it right or wrong they don't care. It's not a healthy society.

Dave

[mdevour]

A few comments to some of the themes in this thread:

I'm an American. I see the corruption of both dominant political parties. I see the futility of voting in the current system, except to make a protest by voting for minor party candidates. Replacing Republicans with Democrats will make not one whit of difference.

Ninety percent of Americans are deaf and blind to reality. They may not like what the government's doing, but they don't know enough to say what the government should do instead. Most blindly accept propaganda as truth (on both sides).

Michael Moore... is a liar, pure and simple. Don't trust a thing he says. Oh, yes, there are ample and numerous reasons to distrust and condemn our current and past administrations, but Moore resorts to strawmen and lies rather than truth. He's a propagandist of the worst sort.

The UN: Why would you choose to supplement your already corrupt and unresponsive local and national governments with a world-level bureaucracy thousands of miles away? If our present governments serve only to distill the worst character from our peoples and place it in power over the rest of us, why on EARTH would you want a government that distills the same qualities from all of humanity? :smiley3:

Spare me from more government. An appropriately jaundiced examination of the United Nations will disabuse you of any notion that they're legitimate. Do not look to the UN to save you.

All politics is local, ultimately.

Be well,

Mike D.

[Lavene]

This is how it looks from this side of the pond: Americans are stupid! Americans refuses to accept any kind of responsibility for their own actions what so ever and hence are totally unable to look after them self. That again makes them so easy to lead that a silly little man with no brains, no credibility and no noticeable IQ can become president.

If an American gets cancer because of smoking... what does he/ she do? Sue/ blame the tobacco companies that enabled him/ her to smoke them self to death.
If an American crashes with his/ her car and gets seriously injured because he/ she didn't wear seatbelts... what does he/ she do? Sue/ blame the car manufacturer that enabled him/ her to drive the car without a seat belt.
Burn your self on hot coffee? Sue someone! Cut your self on a knife? Sue!

A great past-time activity in Europe is reading the warnings aimed at stupid Americans. "Warning! Don't eat the plastic bag!". "Warning! The content may get hot when heated!". "Warning! Hitting someone with this hammer may cause injury or death!" And you people try to rule the world? Come on... just how should this *not* end in disaster?

Americans are completely deprived of logic: "We'll keep on killing you until you stop hating us!" "We shall bring democracy to you wether you like it or not." "The Iraqi people are finally free!" (They keep dying at an alarming rate but at least they die as free people... right?).

I can't say I generally hate Americans since I only know a few of them personally. But I hate America! I really do. I don't give a damn if Mr Moore is a liar or not. His silly 'documentaries' doesn't really fly over here. I don't give a damn about 9/11. But I do give a damn about innocent people dying wherever it is. Approx 45000 civilians just in Iraq so far (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/). That kinda puts the 3000 or so that died on 9/11 in the shadow doesn't it? Most people there has no almost no food and water. No electricity and other utilities. But at least they are free... right?

I hate your government! I Hate your President. I hate Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeldt and pretty much the rest of the lot. And thank god for the fact that I live in a part of the world where I can still say that.

Tina

PS: I guess I'm going too far here but I honestly believe these things can't be said too often.

[fos]

We are fortunate that we live in countries where we DO have the freedoms to express our opinions and live lives pretty much untouched.

Many of the countries harboring and fostering terrorists do not have that freedom.

fos...

[lisi]

> Many of the countries harboring and fostering terrorists do not have that freedom.

Except the USA of course. It has been fostering and supporting the IRA terrorists both morally and financially for years. Who does it invite to the White House on St. Patrick's day? The SDLP, which had been campaigning democratically for joining the Irish Republic and uniting the island? Of course not. Sinn Fein, referred to (appositely) by the extremist Protestants as "Sinn Fein/IRA.

Lisi

[morgoth]

> Many of the countries harboring and fostering terrorists do not have that freedom.

Except the USA of course. It has been fostering and supporting the IRA terrorists both morally and financially for years. Who does it invite to the White House on St. Patrick's day? The SDLP, which had been campaigning democratically for joining the Irish Republic and uniting the island? Of course not. Sinn Fein, referred to (appositely) by the extremist Protestants as "Sinn Fein/IRA.

Lisi

Don't even remotely get me started on Sinn Fein and the IRA. The English have long since forcefully dominated, and restricted the Irish language and culture and religion. Irish land was taken away from them and given to worthless English citizens to spite the Irish. Go check your history, you might find I'm right. I say good on the IRA, and I say good riddance to the English off Irish soil. What England did to Ireland a long time ago is no different to what the US is now doing to Iraq. Domination, lies and propoganda.

Dave

[morgoth]

We are fortunate that we live in countries where we DO have the freedoms to express our opinions and live lives pretty much untouched.

Many of the countries harboring and fostering terrorists do not have that freedom.

fos...

That's bullshit. If I were to openly criticise Bush and Co and the current government I'd soon have my phone calls listened to, my emails monitored, myself tracked and spied on physically, and possibly arrested as an "enemy combatant" and locked away without trial, justice etc. I don't call that freedom of speech. Don't give me that bullshit, the US is one of the worst countries in the world for freedoms and democracy.

As to terrorists, these terrorists have nothing to do with the local running of the government. They might seek protection from the government, but they don't politically interfere with the running of the government. There's no proof for that correlation whatsoever. Tell me, is the US going to invade Thailand now to restore a democratic government and bring 'peace' to the Thai people? I bet not. Will the US invade China to make sure that it's people have a democratic society and freedoms (including freedom of speech)? I bet not. The US typically is a bully, it only picks wars it knows (or at least thinks) it can win.

The recent invasion of Lebanese territory by Israel was a front for the US. The US didn't want to do it itself, as it already has enough bad PR. So it gets its buddy, Israel to do it, whilst it supplies weapons and food and monies behind the scenes. A sponsored war. That way Israel takes the flack, not the US. And since everyone feels so sorry for Israel, because of the atrocities that happened in WWII, they feel obliged to let them get away with blue murder. Illegal invasions? No worry. Usage of illegal chemical warfare? No worry. Israel complains to the UN for a resolution? No worry, sure, you can send 10,000 troops within Lebanese territory (ie. a UN sanctioned invasion) for as long as you like, without question, to use whatever force you deem is necessary. Go figure.

As others have put it, the UN is really a front for the US's world domination attempts.

Tina - I totally agree with you, a lot of Americans just seem to be plain stupid. Australia has all sorts of agreements with the US, so technically speaking my freedoms of speech are limited, I'm meant to tow the line and be "Australian" and honour our governments political alliances etc. I say 'fuck you' to our current government. I have a right to freedom of speech, and if my current overlords don't like it, tough shit. I'd rather go to jail or be murdered by the bastards than give up my rights. They can break my body, but they cannot break my spirit.

Dave

[lisi]

Don't even remotely get me started on Sinn Fein and the IRA. The English have long since forcefully dominated, and restricted the Irish language and culture and religion. Irish land was taken away from them and given to worthless English citizens to spite the Irish. Go check your history, you might find I'm right. I say good on the IRA, and I say good riddance to the English off Irish soil. What England did to Ireland a long time ago is no different to what the US is now doing to Iraq. Domination, lies and propoganda.

Dave
Yes, the English behaved badly in the past. (Find me a nation that has not at some time behaved badly.) But if you check your history, you will find that the problem in Ulster is caused by the extreme protestants, who won't (so far) even negotiate with or talk to Sinn Fein. These extremists are the descendants of *Scots* Presbyterians not of the English.

Moreover, I cannot be the only English person who would be more than delighted to hand the Irish problem over to the government of the Republic of Ireland. But Dublin wouldn't want Ulster any more than I do. Yes, they would get the IRA, but they would also get the LVF. So terrorism wouldn't stop.

I am sad that you think terrorism rather than the ballot box - Sinn Fein rather than the SDLP - should be encouraged. I think ALL terrorism is wrong, including that perpetrated by governments. All the people of Ulster have to do is vote for reunification. But even many Catholics didn't want that until recently. Once they vote to go they will be handed over with a sigh of relief.

Incidentally, I take it that you think all territory should be handed back to the aboriginal people of an area. The Native Americans will, I am sure, be delighted to hear that. (Oh, no - come to think of it, some people think that there were Caucasions there before them; so perhaps everyone should get out of teh USA and let the wilderness have it back.)

Lisi

[morgoth]

No one owns the land, it's mother natures. Period. Man is pathetic in his attempts to control nature.

And yes, I do realise that a lot of the issues stem because of differences in religion - protestant vs catholic, etc. Protestants have a lot to answer for (they were the main instigators of the Witch hunts that killed millions and millions of innocents) in my eyes.

LVF? Don't you mean the UVF (Ulsterman Volunteer Forces I think it stands for)?

Dave

[lisi]

No one owns the land, it's mother natures. Period. Man is pathetic in his attempts to control nature.

And yes, I do realise that a lot of the issues stem because of differences in religion - protestant vs catholic, etc. Protestants have a lot to answer for (they were the main instigators of the Witch hunts that killed millions and millions of innocents) in my eyes.

LVF? Don't you mean the UVF (Ulsterman Volunteer Forces I think it stands for)?

Dave
No, I meant *L*VF - Loyalist Volunteer Force. But Dublin probably wouldn't want the rest of the UVF either. Frankly, I think that the best thing that could happen to England is for the United Kingdom to break up inside the EU. Our present government has already (unintentionally!) started that process on its way. There would then be no UK for the Paisleyites to belong to.

Lisi

[mdevour]

This is how it looks from this side of the pond: Americans are stupid! Americans refuses to accept any kind of responsibility for their own actions what so ever and hence are totally unable to look after them self. That again makes them so easy to lead that a silly little man with no brains, no credibility and no noticeable IQ can become president.

Generally I will agree with your sentiments here, though not some of the details.

I say this from the perspective of having been involved in campaigns for public office: The system is so far gone that most honest, respectable people see no point in running any more. It is a waste of time. I'll leave it to your imagination who that leaves in charge.

Having said that, let me warn you not to be decieved by all the propaganda. George W. Bush may be a puppet, but he is not stupid. He may be inarticulate, but he is not unskilled. Do not underestimate these people!!

The hatred for America being engendered around the world is not an unintended consequence of our government's ineptitude, but a calculated and expected cost of their agenda, however obscure that agenda may be to the likes of you and me.

The puppetmasters treat the world as their playground, while we wouldn't recognise their names. They only use the United States as their most visible tool at the moment. Do not let yourself be seduced by their game.

A great past-time activity in Europe is reading the warnings aimed at stupid Americans. "Warning! Don't eat the plastic bag!". "Warning! The content may get hot when heated!". "Warning! Hitting someone with this hammer may cause injury or death!"

Ladders are more expensive here entirely because of the endless lawsuits against the manufacturers!


I can't say I generally hate Americans since I only know a few of them personally. But I hate America! I really do. I don't give a damn if Mr Moore is a liar or not.


Moore is part of the noise to distract you from what's important. Like the strident Democrats whose mantra is "Bush is evil" but deny the evil of what they want to put in his place!

I hate your government! I Hate your President. I hate Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeldt and pretty much the rest of the lot.

Given the information that you have to go on, why shouldn't you? Be wary, however, for those encouraging you to hate Bush are not motivated by the good of mankind, but rather their own lust for power.

And thank god for the fact that I live in a part of the world where I can still say that.

I can still say such things, as well. Despite appearances, distorted in the lens of our oppositionist media, all of Bush's alleged abuses of civil rights still effect a vanishingly small portion of our population. It does not affect our daily lives, except to the degree that the mainstream media uses it to incite fear and anger.

I guess I'm going too far here but I honestly believe these things can't be said too often.

Too far? Or perhaps just short of far enough!?

Be well, ma'am.

Mike D.

[Lavene]

Given the information that you have to go on, why shouldn't you? Be wary, however, for those encouraging you to hate Bush are not motivated by the good of mankind, but rather their own lust for power.

No need to patronize me. You see, I'm able to think for my self. I decide for my self what and who to believe. And my opinions about Bush's America is based soly on what I see. And I see death and destruction. Innocent people in huge numbers that dies because of America's actions every single day.

And I see how it affects me and my country. We are 'forced' (we have a spineless government too) to take part in the 'war against terror' spending huge amount of money fighting an enemy no one is able to show me. And because of this war cuts are made in other budgets like the police budget so that the number of solved crimes go down and the crime rate goes up.

The military which main task is to defend my country now are forced to upgrade from defensive weapons to offensive weapons. We end up buying the Joint Strikefighter, a very offensive attack plane. But we don't need speed, stealth and VTOL... all of which comes at the cost of weapon carry capability. To defend our self we simply need a capable plane that can carry massive weapon loads. We simply need to be able to out gun the enemy. The government was very interested in the Eurofighter until the 'war on terror' came a long... get my drift?

I see people in Norway being murdered, raped or beaten up and the police have no money to carry out a decent investigation and because they have to put huge resources into protecting the American embassy. I see people die in traffic because the money that was supposed to go into fixing dangerous roads is redirected to the 'war on terror'.

I could go on and on... my point is that I'm not a blind follower of M. Moore or other politically correct Bush haters. I look at the world and draw my own conclusions based on what I see not what I'm told. I'm not American... I'm able to think for my self ;)

Tina

[mdevour]

No need to patronize me. You see, I'm able to think for my self. I decide for my self what and who to believe. And my opinions about Bush's America is based soly on what I see. And I see death and destruction. Innocent people in huge numbers that dies because of America's actions every single day.

Tina, I'm sorry! I have no intention of patronizing you. I've always been impressed by your intelligence and independence of mind.

And I see how it affects me and my country. We are 'forced' (we have a spineless government too) to take part in the 'war against terror' spending huge amount of money fighting an enemy no one is able to show me....

[examples of economic consequences, snipped...]


Interesting... Either you are much more observant than I am, or else the effects on your economy are more direct and visible than here. We have so much economic inertia, plus the buffer effect of seemingly bottomless credit, that the real costs of all our adventurism and interference abroad are simply not being felt (yet) by the average American.

Sure, gasoline prices spiked to $3 a gallon for a while, but here we are, a few weeks out from the mid-term elections, and they've dropped back to $2 -- just in time for the pain to have begun to dull before people cast their votes!

Gotta love those Republicans! :smiley4:

I could go on and on... my point is that I'm not a blind follower of M. Moore or other politically correct Bush haters. I look at the world and draw my own conclusions based on what I see not what I'm told. I'm not American... I'm able to think for my self ;)

I am American and also think for myself! The exception proves the rule, unfortunately.

What I am responding to is the recitation of Democratic National Committee sound bites by people who don't have much opportunity to hear the rest of the spectrum of opinion and commentary on issues in this country. What you hear out of Reuters, the BBC, AP, and our major networks is strongly biased toward liberal Democrat views, thus the characterization of Bush as unintelligent and bumbling, and our foreign policy as inept -- neither of which is true.

You don't get to be even a sock puppet at those levels without being a canny and smart player, as Bush is, and the people behind him. Nor is any aspect of our foreign policy and its effects anything but deliberate and accounted for...

And the next president, whoever he or she may be, will continue the program with at most cosmetic adjustments.

Which ought to give you chills; and that is my intent.

Mike D.

[danieldk]

Right, and in the meanwhile half of the world is burning to support "the american lifestyle" (I quote this, because Europe has an equal share in this). Fact is that people are working in sweatshops to make our clothes, fighting wars over raw materials that are used in cell phones, and processing our toxic weights. And let's not get started on the massive amount of energy consumption others will never have because we used it in half a century.

Yes, the "war on terror" can be felt everywhere (like Tina said). We need a lot of investements in education and healthcare. Instead, the government invests a couple of billion in the joint strike fighter. 'Terror' is the word of the day, but there has never been an attack in the Netherlands. And even if this would happen, this is one of the characteristics of an open society: bad things can happen. While it sounds harsh: just deal with it. It has happened for ages, but other generations haven't put our freedom on stake.

The so-called 'freedom alliance' actually reduces freedom in the world. Ever since Bush started his crusades, wiretapping increased, internet traffic is actively monitored, laws restricting freedom are introduced (i.e. in some EU countries it is now illegal to defend terrorists acts. Is this the free world, where you can't express your opinion if the government doesn't like it?), etc. Really, the only thing Bush and his European Collegues have done is reduce democracy and freedom. They replaced it with fear and government power.

Really, in Europe "the war on terror" can be felt everywhere, and negatively. So, it is not much of a suprise that the large majority of the EU population despises the current US foreign policy and Bush.

That said. "Terror" isn't much of a threat at all, compared with future problems of melting gletschers, waste, toxic water, toxic waste, energy shortages. Did you know that, even in the UK, it is harder and harder to get/make clean water? But these issues don't give you many votes these days.

[danieldk]

BTW, mdevour, thanks for giving your opinion in a group of pretty much the opposite opinion. It is good to hear other sides of the story.

[mdevour]

BTW, mdevour, thanks for giving your opinion in a group of pretty much the opposite opinion. It is good to hear other sides of the story.

Hehe, Daniel, I don't know how 'opposite' my opinion is. I'm just in a little better position to portray reality here, which is not what you get in the media. Things are both better and worse than they appear. :smiley3:

Peace,

Mike D.

[fos]

I received about 40 vbforum database errors last night. All from an "unregistered" user. I sure hope the Men In Black aren't tampering with this forum due to the sensitive political nature of this thread! You never know when the phone cops might show up!

fos....:smiley6:

[lurch]

Interesting how the USA has become synonymous with America. The latter really includes North, Central, and South America. Perhaps instead of USA it ought to be SUSPNA - The Sometimes United States of Part of North America.

[bhobjj]

Interesting... Either you are much more observant than I am, or else the effects on your economy are more direct and visible than here. We have so much economic inertia, plus the buffer effect of seemingly bottomless credit, that the real costs of all our adventurism and interference abroad are simply not being felt (yet) by the average American.

It is called "Buy now, Pay later." It is a legacy of the "WWII generation". It is a terrible thing to pass the debt on to the next generation. It doesn't matter which of the two political parties are in power. They each want to spend as much money as possible. We have a choice between the "Republican" socialists or the "Democratic" socialists. Neither of these political parties operate in the best interests of the future of our nation. Calling either of these parties "conservative" or "liberal" has altered the definitions of these words.

Is there much of any difference between the two major parties? No. The small, almost insignificant difference is greatly exaggerated. Look at how closely divided are many of the ballot results. The other part of the story is less than 30% of the voters are voting.

The only significant growth in the economy is in the healthcare industry.
Our government tells us that inflation is almost nil (now that they exempt food and fuel). Do you believe that the inflation rate has been very low?
My raw material costs have increased 75% - 150% in the past two years. Bulk chemicals increased 25% - 30%. Shipping 20% - 40% Energy 25% - 30% . The only thing that may be making prices look stable is the increase in sales of inferior quality goods (from China) replacing the sales of better quality goods.


What you hear out of Reuters, the BBC, AP, and our major networks is strongly biased toward liberal Democrat views,
In your opinion.

Members of the Democratic party claim the exact opposite.

In my opinion, the media are nothing more than toadies for the people in power and, the politicians are toadies for the powerful corporations.


And the next president, whoever he or she may be, will continue the program with at most cosmetic adjustments.

Because there is very little difference between the political parties except for rhetoric and posturing.
Can ordinary people effect change?
Yes, politicians will do everything they can to give the appearance that they are doing what is popular with the people.

In April 1970, 20 million Americans participated in Earth Day. Before the end of the year, the congress was working on legislation that led to the Clean Air Act, The Clean Water Act, The Safe Drinking Water Act, and the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency regulatory agency.

In recent years, many of these previously self-funded programs have had the funding changed so that funded by taxpayers on the local and state and level. For example Superfund. This used to be funded by the producers. If you produced, for example arsenic compounds, then you had to pay into the superfund a tax of $10/ton of elemental arsenic used in your production process. This is no longer the case. Now the cleanup costs for the hazardous waste cleanup is usually paid for by local taxes. Local taxpayers help to subsidized industries in many ways.

[morgoth]

It is called "Buy now, Pay later." It is a legacy of the "WWII generation". It is a terrible thing to pass the debt on to the next generation. It doesn't matter which of the two political parties are in power. They each want to spend as much money as possible. We have a choice between the "Republican" socialists or the "Democratic" socialists. Neither of these political parties operate in the best interests of the future of our nation. Calling either of these parties "conservative" or "liberal" has altered the definitions of these words.

Is there much of any difference between the two major parties? No. The small, almost insignificant difference is greatly exaggerated. Look at how closely divided are many of the ballot results. The other part of the story is less than 30% of the voters are voting.

The only significant growth in the economy is in the healthcare industry.
Our government tells us that inflation is almost nil (now that they exempt food and fuel). Do you believe that the inflation rate has been very low?
My raw material costs have increased 75% - 150% in the past two years. Bulk chemicals increased 25% - 30%. Shipping 20% - 40% Energy 25% - 30% . The only thing that may be making prices look stable is the increase in sales of inferior quality goods (from China) replacing the sales of better quality goods.


In your opinion.

Members of the Democratic party claim the exact opposite.

In my opinion, the media are nothing more than toadies for the people in power and, the politicians are toadies for the powerful corporations.



Because there is very little difference between the political parties except for rhetoric and posturing.
Can ordinary people effect change?
Yes, politicians will do everything they can to give the appearance that they are doing what is popular with the people.

In April 1970, 20 million Americans participated in Earth Day. Before the end of the year, the congress was working on legislation that led to the Clean Air Act, The Clean Water Act, The Safe Drinking Water Act, and the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency regulatory agency.

In recent years, many of these previously self-funded programs have had the funding changed so that funded by taxpayers on the local and state and level. For example Superfund. This used to be funded by the producers. If you produced, for example arsenic compounds, then you had to pay into the superfund a tax of $10/ton of elemental arsenic used in your production process. This is no longer the case. Now the cleanup costs for the hazardous waste cleanup is usually paid for by local taxes. Local taxpayers help to subsidized industries in many ways.

Bravo Bob, well put. Australia is no different, but sadly, like many Americans, most of our populace are dumb mindless zombies who don't care, they simply want someone else to make the hard decisions. They want a democracy where they don't have to think, or be responsible for their governments decisions. When you try and educate them they think you're some left/right political wanker and they distance themselves from you. The best thing we could do is hope some selective virus wipes out these types from our populations, and if it wipes out the governments as well, great. We could do with reducing our population anyways...

Dave

[morgoth]

I received about 40 vbforum database errors last night. All from an "unregistered" user. I sure hope the Men In Black aren't tampering with this forum due to the sensitive political nature of this thread! You never know when the phone cops might show up!

fos....:smiley6:

FOS - can you make it so that posts are not publically readable without signing in? Can you trace the IP address of the offender? What sort of errors were they?

Dave

edit: If it is the men in black, say hi from me :)

[AndreL]

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ BRACE YOURSELF: _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/



The March to War: Naval build-up in the Persian Gulf and the Eastern Mediterranean.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20061001&articleId=3361

The March to War: Iran Preparing for US Air Attacks
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=N20060921&articleId=3299

"Cold War Shivers": War Preparations in the Middle East and Central Asia
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20061006&articleId=3407

The Emerging Russian Giant Plays its Cards Strategically
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=WIL20061007&articleId=3408

Coup In Iraq?
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/10/06/coup_in_iraq.php

Israel Deploys Nuclear Weapons against Iran
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060925&articleId=3325

North Korea conducts first nuclear test
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/061009033412.ecq6th8f.html

North Korea Pushes Japan Further Down Nuclear Path
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/North_Korea_Pushes_Japan_Further_Down_Nuclear_Path _999.html

Uncertainty The Only Certainty In Future Course Of Global War On Terror
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Uncertainty_The_Only_Certainty_In_Future_Course_Of _Global_War_On_Terror_999.html

Chavez Vehemently Denies Venezuela Harbors Arab Terrorists
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=2066
Note: The US wants to go there, also...

US Suspects China Developing Biological And Chemical Weapons
http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_Suspects_China_Developing_Biological_And_Chemic al_Weapons_999.html

The War on You: U.S. Government Targeting of American Dissidents - Part I
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/members/100306_war_you1.shtml

Why the Military Commissions Act Is “Flagrantly Unconstitutional” -- Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy On the Military Commissions Act, S. 3930
http://progressive.org/mag_leahy100606

"Bush Pardons Himself": Detainee Legislation Provides Retroactive Immunity for Bush Adminstration War crimes. http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20061007&articleId=3416

America’s Blinders
http://progressive.org/mag_zinn0406


The Spoils of War: Afghanistan's Multibillion Dollar Heroin Trade
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?cont (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20050614&articleId=91)xt=viewArticle&code=CHO20050614&articleId=91 (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20050614&articleId=91)

Both Democrats and Republicans - accept any crime against the World
http://www.rinf.com/columnists/news/both-democrats-and-republicans-accept-any-crime-against-the-world

and it keeps on going... going... going... http://www3.sympatico.ca/landre/E-Bunny2.jpeg
.
.

[morgoth]

Some interesting reading AndreL :)

What's the latest bandwagon? International outrage against North Korea testing a thermonuclear weapon. Wow. Our lovely dishonourable Prime Minister Jonny "boy" Howard has slammed the North Korean government. My oh my! Maybe Mr Howard should mind his own business (as should the US). Recent reports of mistreatment of our Aboriginal population, and the stolen generation and the resulting criticism of the Australian government drew a nice repost from Howard - he basically told the international community to fuck off and mind their own business, and this was an Australian matter and no one elses business. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. This is why I call Howard a wanker. He instills so much hate in me, as does Bush Jr.

Dave

[AndreL]

Yep! And anyone who believes that a change in government (USA, Britain, Australia, etc.) will change this is in for a sweeeeeet ride!!!

[mdevour]

It is called "Buy now, Pay later." It is a legacy of the "WWII generation". It is a terrible thing to pass the debt on to the next generation. It doesn't matter which of the two political parties are in power. They each want to spend as much money as possible. We have a choice between the "Republican" socialists or the "Democratic" socialists. Neither of these political parties operate in the best interests of the future of our nation. Calling either of these parties "conservative" or "liberal" has altered the definitions of these words. ... Is there much of any difference between the two major parties? No. ... The other part of the story is less than 30% of the voters are voting.


Agreed on all points, Bob. The Republicans might be more fascist and the Democrats more Marxist, but it's all at the same end of the freedom spectrum.


What you hear out of Reuters, the BBC, AP, and our major networks is strongly biased toward liberal Democrat views,

In your opinion.

Members of the Democratic party claim the exact opposite.


Of course they do. Until the rise of popular "conservative" commentators on talk radio, they had the airwaves to themselves. To see any change at all in that situation (e.g. Fox News) is so politically dangerous for them they squeal like stuck pigs!

Think about it: The way elections go these days, it's obvious that Republicans make up very close to 50% of people who vote. Do their positions get equal coverage in the so called news? Nope. The only way to get a fair representation of a Republican point of view is to listen to those same conservative commentators. The "news" is written from the standpoint that Democrat values are normal and mainstream, while Republican views are only (and inadequately) presented for "balance" and "fairness."

What was it, something like 85 to 90% of those who write and present "the news" self identify as Democrats?

And, of course, this doesn't say a thing about the 70% of the people who don't vote, or, like me, vote for alternative candidates. Who represents our views?

In my opinion, the media are nothing more than toadies for the people in power and, the politicians are toadies for the powerful corporations.

Pretty much, but there's a lot of energy that goes into deciding who gets their hands on the levers of power and the bribe money.

Media bias is real. It's just not as important as it used to be. With all the alternative media on radio and the internet, the monopoly on the flow of information and the power of forming public opinion is breaking down.


Because there is very little difference between the political parties except for rhetoric and posturing. Can ordinary people effect change? Yes, politicians will do everything they can to give the appearance that they are doing what is popular with the people.


You're more optimistic than I am, I guess! :smiley4:

I really don't have a dog in this race. I'm not a Republican or a Democrat. I can see where each side has a few good positions I agree with, and a huge chunk of positions they all agree on that I detest.

So, which part of your liberty would you like to see attacked this term? Pull the lever, mate!!!

Mike D.

[morgoth]

Well, an example of how the media is deliberately censoring freedom of speech to suit political needs. Check this page out:

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/yoursay/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/north_korea_ups_the_stakes_on_nuclear_weapons/

Scroll down and look for a comment by Shane:

Posted by Shane on Mon 09 Oct 06 at 04:13pm
I think we should carpet bomb the North Korean capital, and assasinate Kim Jong Il.

Another comment a bit further up by Nuke 'em of Sydney:

Posted by Nuke 'em of Sydney on Mon 09 Oct 06 at 03:12pm
The Good Ol’ US of A should conduct a Nuke test in the middle of Pyongyang and see if Kim Jong-Il will be celebrating then. Unfortunately if the US let the DPRK get away with this, Iran will then use it as an example to push on with their objectives. That’s all the world needs, another mad man with Nuclear Weapons.

The blog admin has allowed both of these comments to be posted, but not my anti American comments which basically said for Australia and the US to mind their own business and that we had no right to tell North Korea what to do. I'll be ringing the Daily Telegaph today to voice a formal complaint and will follow this up with our Media watchdog.

Dave

[bhobjj]

The "news" is written from the standpoint that Democrat values are normal and mainstream, while Republican views are only (and inadequately) presented for "balance" and "fairness."

What was it, something like 85 to 90% of those who write and present "the news" self identify as Democrats?


I agree. I think there are a few factors.
- Journalism has somewhat of a "social activist" tradition. If you want to win the big awards, how can you do this?

- Larger cities=larger news corporations vs rural towns=small newspapers and radio stations. People in rural areas are traditionally more conservative.

Although the USA has some large population centers like Los Angelas County with something like 8% of the population and the New York metropolitan area with more than 5%, most of the people in the USA live in suburbs and rural areas.

To a lot of other nations though, the United States looks like a Fundamentalist Christian Nation.



So, which part of your liberty would you like to see attacked this term? Pull the lever, mate!!!

Mike D.

That is the question. Is it time to rewrite the constitution and take a new stand?

-BoB

[mdevour]

Well, an example of how the media is deliberately censoring freedom of speech to suit political needs. ...
The blog admin has allowed both of these comments to be posted, but not my anti American comments which basically said for Australia and the US to mind their own business and that we had no right to tell North Korea what to do.

Either you got to 'em, or else they just didn't get around to approving the posts for a while. Yours are there, along with some snarky comments from the editorial writer. :)

Mike D.

[morgoth]

Yes, they're there. Only after I rang and spoke to the editor, Ricky, over the phone. Apparently, he had around 60 posts to go through (and hadn't looked at it since late yesterday afternoon). Not all of my posts have been submitted it seems, but they have remained unedited.

I have formally complained to the Minister for Communications about this particular blog - the Daily Telegraph allowing such comments as I quoted to be posting is what I consider illegal. Ricky tried to explain to me that 'it's a blog' and I tried to explain to him that some things were not suitable to be published, which he just didn't agree with. It's obvious from his comments to me that said quoted comments were deliberated uploaded to the website to generate outrage and more viewers/readers and more people posting their comments. Typical modern media outlet views - outrage sells papers.

We have our very own Mr "Elmer Fudd" Downer having a nice meeting with the head diplomat for North Korea and condemning them. It's nice to see this wanker can't criticise the US for several recent pieces of legislation that contravene the Geneva Conventions and United Nations Charter of Human Rights. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. This is partly why I despise polticians, they apply rules differently to different things to suit their own political agendas. If I was North Korea I'd recall all of their political ambassadors and give the thumb up to the rest of the world. Or should that be finger? And I'd be fully developing ICMBs and smaller nukes to keep those pesky US and Australian governments from interfering further. As far as I'm concerned, if the UN imposes sanctions against North Korea at the behest of the US and Australia, that's an act of war, and North Korea is quite within its rights as a sovereign nation to take full actions as it sees fit.

You'll note that the US didn't jump up and down when India developed its own thermonuclear devices. Why? Because many US companies abuse Indian citizens with slave labour and it would cause repercussions to the US economy. Please, on please let Iran get nukes as well, and nuke the oil fields in the middle east. That'll do irrreparable damage to the US [and other countries] economies, and that's the best thing that could happen to the world imho.

I don't want this planet to be ruled by the US. I'd rather see humanity destroyed utterly, that's how much I despise the US regime.

Dave

[jjmac]

howdy ...

I haven't read through the thread as yet but will just post this preliminary, as it is a strong issue. And then go and read through it all ...

A lot of strange political things are going on these days. Or are just becoming more apparent. More public awarness seems to occuring than has over the last century. Which would be expected with the proliferation of communication technologies thats occured. It's like some sought of imperative has been created over the last couple of decades, and the powers are just going through the stages towards some sought of ... of what ???. A bit like the lamingtons that from time to time, all line up and march along the shop counter to the far end. Then jump off (grin). Though, it isn't really that funny when it appears to be really happening.

The way i figure it,

After the 'cold war' ended, considering that a lot of the various national economies had economic interests/dependancies on its continuation ... that all of a sudden there wasn't a need to keep the supportive industries anymore. How is a career military person going to get a head if there isn't a conflict some where to provide the credence, so to for industry. So terror was created as the great new threat as a substitute, even though it has always been there. Along with the irony of promoting terror as a solution. But, now they can continue on as before. And all the money making dosen't have to stop. It is a bad thing. And it is a weak thing. And like M Mouse with his pointy hat an wand ... bound to get out of hand eventually. I don't believe militant action is a solution. Attempting to 'heavy' politicians/media people will only cause them them to affirm their beliefs as a defencive reaction. And so just add to the overall problem. Solutions: no. not really, i don't have all the relavent informatin, or a scerick of the power ... but a person can and should resist. Anger/aggresion is a form of weakness which will instinctively evoke the same. Either as a preditory act or as a defensive one based on the same emotion. Bush, Howard, conservatives etc, are all afraid of something, but there notquite sure what it is. So, to find closure, they create reasons. So, there is some work around hidden there somewhere ... either that or i'm going to have to just head for the hills one of these days, and try to figure it out there ... behind some kind of wall i would expect too.

The Hicks issue in particular, sits very badly with me.


jm

[mdevour]

If I was North Korea I'd ... be fully developing ICMBs and smaller nukes to keep those pesky US and Australian governments from interfering further. As far as I'm concerned, if the UN imposes sanctions against North Korea at the behest of the US and Australia, that's an act of war, and North Korea is quite within its rights as a sovereign nation to take full actions as it sees fit. ... Please, on please let Iran get nukes as well, and nuke the oil fields in the middle east. That'll do irrreparable damage to the US [and other countries] economies, and that's the best thing that could happen to the world imho.

I don't want this planet to be ruled by the US. I'd rather see humanity destroyed utterly, that's how much I despise the US regime.

So, nukes going off in Seoul, Jerusalem, Baghdad or Washington D.C. would be okay with you, David?

Mike D.

[lurch]

Dave, I prefer to believe in international co-operation and peace rather than wish the world to be destroyed. Of course, you could always change your log in name to "Hu Flung Dung", learn to say fluently in Mandarin and Cantonese "What is your command master", and be in the vanguard to embrace the rising empire of China. Empires rise and fall in history; I just hope the next round is not the last one for humanity. History also tells us that without the decisive assistance of the USA in the Battle of the Coral Sea during WWII, we might have attained an early fluency in Japanese.

Regards,
Phillip.

[morgoth]

So, nukes going off in Seoul, Jerusalem, Baghdad or Washington D.C. would be okay with you, David?

Mike D.

OK - I'll be blunt. North Korea has every single right to have nukes. The US, Australia, or any other country have no legal right to stop North Korea. I find the idea of economic sanctions against North Korea appalling, a form of economic bribery. The US continually bleats about world peace and freedom of speech and democracy etc, but it's the last country on the Earth to be a true democracy. It's the pot calling the kettle black. Instead Bush Jr. the war mongerer introduces new and despising acts of legislation, illegally invades sovereign countries etc etc. So much for US democracy. Someone has to tell Bush Jr. the real definition of democracy and freedom of speech. Quite possibly, the US might want to fix its own problems before it sticks its ugly head in other countries problems. No one voted the US as the world police officer, in fact, most people, in most countries despise the US political stance, and don't generally think too much of most Americans either. You're considered gung ho, arrogant asses in many countries. Whilst I know that not every American is like that, many are. If the US is so worried about world peace, and the world in general, then why don't they put their money where their mouth is and get rid of ALL of their nukes? Why don't they abide by the Kyoto agreement that they signed? When you have a political system that has one rule for me, and one rule for people I don't like, that's not equality. And that's what the US is pushing for.

I stand by my earlier comments, I'd rather see the destruction of humanity than to have the US running the world's nations politically. Sadly, most people are stupid and lazy and they're quite happy to have their rights continuously removed from them without questioning. If you think that individuals are going to change the polticial environment in the US, think again. Your voting system is rigged so that it's a 2 party system, neither of which care about the people, or listen to the people, or have any spines. Your voting system is rigged to the point that only the filthy rich can afford to stand up and sit the voting system. Your voting system is rigged so that the corporate bodies bribe governments to do their bidding, instead of doing what they should be doing, which is abiding by the will of the people. This type of US influence is now spreading to other countries such as Australia, and in all honesty, I'd rather not have it. It's nothing more than facist, dictatorial regime, no better than Stalin.

You don't have to like my comments, and I really couldn't care less if you do in all honesty. The point is I have every right to speak them.

Dave

[morgoth]

Dave, I prefer to believe in international co-operation and peace rather than wish the world to be destroyed. Of course, you could always change your log in name to "Hu Flung Dung", learn to say fluently in Mandarin and Cantonese "What is your command master", and be in the vanguard to embrace the rising empire of China. Empires rise and fall in history; I just hope the next round is not the last one for humanity. History also tells us that without the decisive assistance of the USA in the Battle of the Coral Sea during WWII, we might have attained an early fluency in Japanese.

Regards,
Phillip.

You ain't going to see this Phillip. The big stopper for this is the Veto vote that the UN presents to certain "key" nations. Get rid of that, and have a democratic vote, majority rules. The US will never agree to this because it likes the Veto vote - when it suits it. The UN needs to have the balls to take economic sanctions against countries that have poor human rights issues. It won't because these very member nations are more interested in trade agreements and money than true world peace or human rights. China's human rights are appalling, yet I do not see the rest of the UN members voting to take full economic sanctions against them. I do not see many companies electing not to make their products in slave labour countries (Nike anyone?). Many of these companies are predominantly US owned and controlled.

Money means more than humans and human rights, and until that is solved, we will not get anywhere, in fact society will only get worse.

Think about what I've said.

Dave

[fos]

It is typically Russia, China, France, & Germany that exercise the veto in the UN Security Council not the US. Most of our vetos are related to Israel. Israel is the only true spark of freedom and civil rights in the middle east.

For me, I find the UN worthless. I would like to see the US get out of the UN and the UN get out of the US.

Flame suit on...

fos

PS. I try to vote for the independent candidate whenever they have even a remote chance of getting elected. Otherwise, I vote for the least damaging politician critter.

[morgoth]

I'd disagree with Israel being the only democratic country in the middle east. Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Egypt all spring to mind as fulfilling those requirements.

As to UN veto votes, quite often Russia, China, UK and France (from memory, Germany does not have veto rights) excercise veto rights on wrongful US intent. You might want to check:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Security_Council_Veto_Power

Note that it says:

Most common users
The majority--more than half--of all vetos in the history of the Security Council were exercised by the Soviet Union. Since shortly before the fall of the USSR, the United States has been the most frequent user of the veto.[1]

Between the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the end of 2004, vetoes were exercised on 19 occasions. For that period, usage breaks down as follows:

the United States used the veto on 13 occasions (11 regarding Israel, one Bosnia, one Panama)
Russia/the Soviet Union used the veto on three occasions (two regarding Cyprus, one Bosnia)

So, veto votes pre fall of USSR were over half of the Veto votes (not surprising given the hardcore communist stance of USSR then, and of course the remnants of the cold war between the USSR and the US). But - since then, since the mid 80s, the US has been the culprit more often than not. Why doesn't that surprise me? The US has been pro Israel since its inception, and this I could argue is solely because the US and Israel are mutually beneficial to each other. Israel gets ordinary arms, chemical arms and nuclear arms from the US, plus a host of technology and training, and in return, Israel stirs up trouble in the middle east, allows a strong base for the US to attack middle eastern countries and spreads pro US propaganda. The most recent attack on Lebanon by Israel was wholly funded by the US. I might not have 100% proof, but that's not my fault. The bastards in power serve to corrupt and hide their lies and involvement.

The easiest way is to remove veto vote completely, and have a majority rules vote - that's the democratic way. Israel would find it'd lose a fair bit, and the US doesn't want that to happen.

Dave

[fos]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Dave. As usual, this is a class group!

My memory is still long term and most of it is dominated by the time prior to the fall of the Berlin wall and then the break up of the USSR. :) Kuwait, Egypt, and Saudi may be progressive for the Arabic world but many there do not have the same rights we expect here in the US and in western Europe, especially when it comes to women's rights.

Going to a majority vote would give the third world countries control. I don't think that would work out very well. Maybe it could be based on the percent of the financial contribution?

At least Goofy Anon and his corrupt administration are fading from the picture.

fos....

PS. I don't think any of the major powers would have signed onto the UN without the veto power. I doubt that they would continue to support the UN without it. I know the US population would quickly throw it out of the county if the UN started to impose a lot of obvious control over the running of our country. There is currently quite a bit of unnecessary control through the use of treaties that have mandatory restrictions. If it ever becomes too obvious, the silent majority will finally wake up and smell the coffee. Maybe it would be a good thing to get rid of the veto system!

[morgoth]

That's why the UN is a non workable solution - at this point of time. Countries are more concerned with running their own show and doing what they want, than working collectively as a global whole. I see no reason why a richer country should have more rights than a poorer country, that is akin to a rich person having more rights than a poor person. It is simply wrong. That is where humanity fails. The US (and other countries) want their own way, all of the time. They don't want to have to concede points to other countries.

Dave

PS you might like the attached image :)