Example: ignorant statements littering this board - I don't

[Stormin Norman]

Here is something I pulled out of the Practice Forum.

MJM says:


'The holocaust was legal' is an indictment on the system we call 'democracy'. Showing/saying it was in fact done legally, within the laws of germany-hitler won the election. Pointing out the obvious flaws of the system.

Maybe if you ask me nicely, I can give you the requirements a government must meet before it can be called a democracy. It is a term that is misunderstood and often misquoted. I think the shallow statement made by MJM exemplifies this point. One need only ask exactly how democractic Germany was to understand how wrong-headed it is to make the statement that the Holocaust is an indictment of democracy.

[Stormin Norman]

Here is another:

"Al gore would have been a great president."

[Stormin Norman]

"Is any of the white people here ashamed of your race? there was a debate at another board about this zso figured i'd bring it here. I feel bad about it sometimes. It sems like we've always been the opressors. Slavery, civil rights, etc. I'm certainly not proud of my race. You can't choose it, so why be proud of it.I've unofficially changed my self to 50% black, 25% hispanic, 15% Asian, 9% arab, and 1% caucasion. I'm like a melting pot." -Len

Damn its a treasure trove in here.

[Aleksander Nordby]

kukkhue

[Stormin Norman]

What's that?

[JoYKiLLaH]

uckfay ouyay itchbay

u have mawi kutas

[antieverything]

It's no secret that there are a bunch of idiots parading around as Leftists in order to piss off their parents...what is your point, exactly, Norm?

[canikickit]

"Is any of the white people here ashamed of your race? there was a debate at another board about this zso figured i'd bring it here. I feel bad about it sometimes. It sems like we've always been the opressors. Slavery, civil rights, etc. I'm certainly not proud of my race. You can't choose it, so why be proud of it.I've unofficially changed my self to 50% black, 25% hispanic, 15% Asian, 9% arab, and 1% caucasion. I'm like a melting pot." -Len


Come now Norm, maybe that wasn't the most intelligently worded post in the history of posts, but it's hardly ignorant.

[Moskitto]

i think the most annoying thing is when someone supports/opposes something because some band does or because the US is involved, and they don't think about the situation,

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I don't really understand the purpose of this forum, but I agree, some of the things were somewhat ignorant, or poorly worded, but do they need to be pointed out?

[canikickit]

Victor, Norm's just showing what a nice guy he is. Always ready with some constructive criticism.

[ComradeJunichi]

I don't really understand the purpose of this forum

[Stormin Norman]

Here is a classic:

"They have higher taxes because Health-care is free and their are other issues, but I'm to lazy to think."-Umoja

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Here is a classic one:

"Captalism makes the world a better place.":biggrin:

[Exploited Class]

Quote: from CCCP on 5:39 pm on Dec. 20, 2002
Here is a classic one:

"Captalism makes the world a better place.":biggrin:

But that quote is true, its just a matter of who's world we are talking about. For the rich world it does make it a better place, for the rich's bufferzone community it also makes their world better. For everybody else however it does not. The quote is acurate when applied to the correct worlds.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

If you are social, not greedy, nobel than u are leftist.

If you are greedy: tja what can I say. Lil hitlerfuckers.

[MJM]

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...um=14&topic=286 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=14&topic=286)

WOW, groundbreaking stuff there LOL. You could at least post the sources so we can see the context of the quotes.
You have an idea of democracy that differs from mine, no surprise there. You can manufacture up a little definition that fits nicely into the current system you live under no doubt?
I'm happy for you and the 50-60% of others who participate in this democracy you speak so highly of.

I'd like to add the rest of the post you're quoting me from to while I'm here, the reason why SN is trying to get back at me I suspect.

The rich man knows the poor are his slaves.


(Edited by MJM at 8:04 pm on Dec. 21, 2002)

[Stormin Norman]

Nothing personal MJM, I just couldn't let you get away with convicting democracy because the Nazis engaged in the holocaust. Your stance seems a bit ridiculous, and I thought it should be pointed out.

By the way, I am open to hearing what you would consider democracy. Since you are a leftist, I am sure you have absolutely no idea what the word entails. Therefore, I would very much like to pick that apart too.

[guerrillaradio]

We've already had a thread with dumb left-winger quotes...get over it.

[Stormin Norman]

"Come now Norm, maybe that wasn't the most intelligently worded post in the history of posts, but it's hardly ignorant."

White guilt is ignorant.

[Stormin Norman]

"If America want to attack a terrorist country why doesn't it just attack itself?!"-Mentalbunny

Mentalbunny appears to be very mental. Mentally retarded.

[Stormin Norman]

"She's saying that Dubya raped her. His goons drugged her and her husband, and he might have raped her husband too."

Of course, this thread would not be complete without a contribution from Micheal De Panama. This is only a mild example of his dillusional rantings.

[Stormin Norman]

"we tell him we disagree
we stand on capitol hill if you are american
we stand on parliment hill if you are canadian
we stand on every damn hill in every damn country and say 'NO'
if that does not work then we take action into our hands
we block traffic infront of his house
we do all we can to make it so he cannot do what he wants
violence if necassary
not against civilians
but against the people who want this war in the american government
against the military who will fight this war
we give the iraqi people peace so they can fight thier war"-This one is from a guy who calls himself CrazyPete. At least he got one thing right when he called himself crazy.

Barracka eat your heart out. I think you have some competition for the Poet Laureate position in New Jersey. This bit of prose should be music to the ears of any mentally deficient mad-dog leftist.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

"If America want to attack a terrorist country why doesn't it just attack itself?!"-Mentalbunny


What's wrong with this quote? The US is the biggest threat in the world and spreads the most terror and has the biggest stock chemical weapons, nukes and normal arms.

(Edited by CCCP at 3:17 pm on Dec. 21, 2002)

[Stormin Norman]

"The Bush administration keeps trying to convince Americans that Saddam is an evil, conniving dictator. Does Bush simply have a problem with the oil, or is Saddam really an evil threat?"

Do you really need to ask?

In response someone wrote:

"Saddam is an evil son of a *****, but he doesnt have any weapons of mass destruction, Bush wants to go to war because of the oil, unless Saddam strikes first America has no right to go in and invade and cause hardships for the Iraqi ppl my 2 cents"

Another example of the suicidal thought process clunge to by illiberals. It seems that this guy is saying that Iraq has the right to attack America first, but the U.S. does not have the right to deter that action by preemptively striking an enemy. Absolutely ludicrous! I am relieved that we are moving our defense policy in the direction of preemption rather than Clinton's method of trying to appease dictators.

[j]

White guilt is not ignorant. Ignorance is "The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed." (from dictionary.com)

I do not believe that white people should feel guilty for the sins of their fathers. White people should feel guilty for being ignorant of history, classism, and racism. If the white person is not ignorant of these things what does he need to feel guilty for?

Norm, you said, "It seems that this guy is saying that Iraq has the right to attack America first, but the U.S. does not have the right to deter that action by preemptively striking an enemy." This statement and the shared sentiments of those who choose to wage preemptive war on Iraq are ignorant of some of the oldest wisdom regarding war.

Sun Tzu said in the Art of War that, "If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."

This is ancient wisdom that still applies to this day. The US failed in Vietnam because they did not understand the enemy or itself. I believe that the US has VERY little understanding of the Iraqi people and their problems. 61% of Americans did not vote in November. The government seems to have little understanding of its people. Therefore they know little about the enemy and little about themselves. The end result of Iraq could essentially be another Vietnam.

Norman-Your comments are rather ignorant. Your signature even more. Some very intelligent socialists include:

Albert Einstein
George Orwell
Albert Camus
Noam Chomsky
WEB DuBois
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Jean Paul Satre
Cornel West
Oscar Wild
John Steinbeck
Victor Hugo

And of course: Karl Marx

It is IGNORANT (The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed) of you to term socialists as unitelligent. You may not agree with them but you can not surely claim that they lack a high level of intelligence. Many capitalists are highly intelligent people (however misguided). You CAN NOT create a post about ignorance among socialists when you BLATANTLY post an IGNORANT signature!!!!!

j

[j]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 9:55 am on Dec. 21, 2002
"If America want to attack a terrorist country why doesn't it just attack itself?!"-Mentalbunny

Mentalbunny appears to be very mental. Mentally retarded.

This, of course, was a rhetorical question. It was used to make a statement about the hypocritical nature of the US fighting a "war on terrorism" when the nation itself supports terror. That would be like me creating a "war on alcohol" knowing that I drink.

This was actually an intelligent post when you look at it rhetorically. However, in your infinite wisdom, you did not seem to grasp this easily understood concept.

j

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

He Stormin Moron ask yourself what will happen to the US if its out of oil.

And if the US is such a fighter of "democracy and freedom". Why do they exploite people then? Why did they help the Mujahideen? Why are they sacrificing personal freedom for safety? While Benjamin Franklin said that who sacrifices his freedom for safety deserves none of them.

[MJM]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 10:48 pm on Dec. 21, 2002
Nothing personal MJM, I just couldn't let you get away with convicting democracy because the Nazis engaged in the holocaust. Your stance seems a bit ridiculous, and I thought it should be pointed out.

By the way, I am open to hearing what you would consider democracy. Since you are a leftist, I am sure you have absolutely no idea what the word entails. Therefore, I would very much like to pick that apart too.


I'm actually pro democracy as are all leftists.
Democracy for people, not for capital.
Pick that apart if you must.

[Stormin Norman]

"I'm actually pro democracy as are all leftists."

That's probably the best one yet.

[Stormin Norman]

"American Impearlism"

It's not the spelling that I am making fun of, it's the actual claim.

[BOZG]

You must have a strange sense of humour. Truth amuses you. Living in Amerikkka you must not get to laugh a lot.

[Stormin Norman]

"Truth amuses you. Living in Amerikkka you must not get to laugh a lot."

Another great one. You're right, our state run media is preventing me from getting any real news devoid of government propaganda. Or maybe I have studied the world objectively and come to my own conclusions. If I were being brainwashed by the media, I would be speaking more along the lines of the rabid leftists on this board.

[Stormin Norman]

"But, if a organization uses a Nuclear Weapon against a country, the country can't retalitate with it's own nuclear strength. So, it's not illogical to build a missle defense system, even though it could end up just being a huge system of orbital lasers."

A state can retaliate if an terrorist organization uses a nuclear device against it. It should attack all of those states who sponsor terrorism. Implicate them all. In fact, that is our stance regarding such an assault.

I don't think anything more need be said about the left's aversion to a defensive system. They have already shown how illogically they think in the thread devoted to that subject.

[BOZG]

So the media is controlled by the left-wing? That has to be quote of the century.

[Stormin Norman]

No but much of the media exhibits a liberal bias. That is a commonly accepted fact to even the most objective observer.


(Edited by Stormin Norman at 12:34 am on Jan. 16, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

"A captalist is someone who doesn't care about some elses rights only about it's wealth. That makes him a facist and liberal is someone who thinks that donating 1 dollar each month will compensate his exploitation of the world."-CCCP

Great action! Great action!

[Stormin Norman]

Here is yet another example of how poorly some of the leftist here understand democracy. 'The U.S. is not democratic' started off on this note:

“How can the USA claim to be democratic when the only political power the ordinary person have is that every 4 years they get to pick which one of 2 virtually identical parties they want to govern them?” –Honest Intellectual

Well accountability is one of the most important aspects of democracy. Therefore voting is a fundamental practice that ensures accountability. Political parties articulate the interest of society, so what is your point about the two catch-all parties present in the U.S.?

“It's a democratic republic” – Tkinker1

Very true, Tkinker. At least someone has a clue.


“so is north korea” - Apocalypse When

Apparently someone here makes the claim that North Korea is democratic. What a buffoon! Trying to compare U.S. democracy with the authoritative regime in North Korea is typical of the America haters that wish to convert the U.S. political system to a communist tyrrany. Chalk one up for Apocalypse When I think this one may take the cake.

[Umoja]

Stormin, I was supporting a Missile Defense system in the statement, because what happens if the terrorist were Irish Nationals, who were able to plan the entire attack from Ireland. Would we be obligided to attack Ireland for not noticing?

So, I'm confused on your opinions towards a missle defense system. Foster more hate so more people can hate us, instead of just having a missle defense system that will probubly lead to some other scientific advancement?

[Stormin Norman]

I still don't understand why you say we can not retaliate with nuclear weapons if a terrorist cell were to plant a suit case nuke in America.

As far as supporting the actual BMD system you are among the few leftist who agree with such a system. That is why I didn't say anything about you specifically with respect to that issue, and referred the reader to the actual post where some argue against it directly.

[Stormin Norman]

"Ppl it seems that the greatest part of the western world is stupid and believe anything that comes on tv. We are way out numbered.They just wont see that america has total world domination and that they dont listen to the ppl. A few months ago i had a arguement about this with a friend of mine. he is one of the stupids. I needed 1 whole hour to explain that the american attack on iraq isnt justified. And there are numerous things that i had to explain to him. Like why has american companys world domination."-CCCP

World domination you say! Hahahaha! That's some funny shit.

"U wanted a example??The murder of Jhon F Kennedy by the CIA. Probaly cause he didnt like the CIA and wanted to lower their budget."-CCCP

You must be the first person to crack the case. The CIA did it, did they? I don't suppose you have any evidence of this, yet you present it as fact.

"Did you all notice something almost all presidents of the US since1945 had something to do with the CIA. Like the current monkey."-CCCP

Folks I think this guy is seriously hurting his credibility by portraying himself as a conspiracy nut. His problem, not mine.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 11:48 pm on Dec. 22, 2002)

[Stormin Norman]

"yeah bonos tha man!"

[Stormin Norman]

"All the U$ does is to police the world! The have been brainwashing the UN so they can do the fucking so they can do the stupid weapon inspections, and they have ordered the UN to stop the food suppliy that goes to North korea. Fucking pigs. Any ways fuck you cappies and swallow your stupid american pride I hate that the shit! Also you have acussed the nazis of stealing stuff during WW2 but the US army stoled tons of stuff that they took from the nazis. The United States of America is the wrost country there is. The people are the nice but the goverment is so fucked off. And you guys didn't win neither the Cold War or WW2!! The soviets were the ones fighting to get to Berlin and the Gorbachov stoped the Cold War because it was nonsence all of that money wasted on weapons and that wepon race and shit. And fuck you!! I am proud to have Zack in my avatar because he had the balls to that concert at DNC in the year 2001!"-Communist Chris

This one was particularly note worthy. This Communist Chris guy is the epitomy of mindless drivle propagated by the left on this board. One must question whether he has above an 8th grade education.

P.S. Zach de Lacucaracha should be jailed for giving money to guerilla groups in South America. He is a supporter of terrorism.


(Edited by Stormin Norman at 1:27 am on Dec. 24, 2002)

[Stormin Norman]

I had to laugh when I came across this jewel:

"Oh, and what exactly is your definition of "democracy"? I believe that Communism is far more democratic than the US ever has. Why, you ask, simple. The government works toward the good of the people, not the mega-rich. Talk all you want about "changing the system by voting" or "electing good officials", because, not only are both american parties almost EXACTLY the same, but power wouldnt switch hands anyway. The corporate control is absolute and will not cease through conventional means. Zack de la Rocha said it best:
"the structure is set, you'll never change it with a ballot pull"."-Fight the Power

Show me one communist country that could be even remotely considered a democracy, wise one. Looks like this guy is also a big Rage Against the Machine fan. One can only ask whether this band's ignorance is contagious.

[Stormin Norman]

"Do you think that you are better than a Mexican or a Canadian? If so, you are racistic. If not why do u need to close up "ur border" for them, doesn't someone deserve to come on soil wich u claim to be urs because he is born at other soil. Following this rules, u say every Indain should have the right to kill US citizens because u are on "there"land.

Need I to say more?"-CCCP

This is were CCCP tried to dub me a racist for defending any countries right to defend its own sovereignty by regulating immigration. Your right CCCP, every third world immigrant has a god given right to come to the U.S. and deplete the welfare resources and contribute to the severe budgetary problems that persist in virtually every state. If that is the kind of 'sound' economic and social policy you support, then you need help. Not to mention, the is an incredible health risk associated with letting immigration go unchecked. Many of the diseases we thought we had rendered insignificant are making come-backs. Many of them particulary resistant strains. The correlation between unchecked immigration and the overstressed health services sector is difficult to ignore. Fact is, we have developed quite a problem, and the U.S. can not continue with its current trend if it plans to remain a 1st world country. I would once again sight the left's notions of unchecked immigration as another one of their ideals that will bring great destruction upon the well being of the citizens who they claim to champion.

Once again I chant:

Suicidal! Suicidal! Suicidal!

Fact: Roughly 30% of the prison population in California and New Mexico consists of illegal imigrants.

Tell me that this is not a catastrophe waiting to happen. We have an epidemic, and those who are elected to do the job of protecting actual U.S. citizens have failed miserably in that task. Bush is currently discussing carrying over Social Security benefits to Mexican nationals residing in the U.S. I ask you what do you think this will do to the social program so highly regarded by the left?

Answer: Have you ever seen a bridge collapse?

Of course Medicaid and Medicare shouldn't be expected to survive this bold move either.

If you ask me the U.S. ought to send a bill to Mexico, and confiscate land when they refuse payment.

[Stormin Norman]

"MacDonalds crashes our econemy it makes people fat, MacDonalds only wanna earn money they don't don't help us. They fuck us, the large amount of meat they 'produce' in the bio-industry affacts the hothouse affect. I won't eat anything by MacDonalds, MacDanalds is EVIL"-Comrade Daniella

LMFAO! A real knee slapper! Tears welling up! Uncontrolable laughter!

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Wow I have been noticed by you. Captalists don't listen, they only comment. Seems that you will be a comrade soon.

Seems that you are already past the first phase.[list]
First: listening
Second: doubt on own opinion
Third: compasion
Fourth: you turn over
[list]

Welcome comrade [size=5]Stormin Moron.:biggrin:


(Edited by CCCP at 6:06 pm on Dec. 23, 2002)

[Goldfinger]

Quote: from Aleksander Nordby on 1:47 pm on Dec. 18, 2002
kukkhue

rassklatt

[synthesis]

Show me one communist country that could be even remotely considered a democracy, wise one.

All righty, we'll give this a try.

Let's have a look at Chile, shall we?

Salvadore Allende was a democratically-elected, Marxist president.

What did the capitalist U.S. do? They removed him and inserted an extreme free-marketeer, Augusto Pinochet. Pinochet went on to kill more than 6,000 people.

Or, how about the Congo?

Patrice Lumumba became the country's first democratically-elected Prime Minister, and was a professed Marxist. In June, 1960, he was assassinated by the U.S. and replaced by Mobutu Sese Soko, a despotic dictator who has ruled ever since.

Brazil?

Joao Goulart was a democratically-elected leftist Catholic who had many Communists in his cabinet. The U.S.-funded government that overthrew him slaughtered priests, criticism of the rulers was punishable by death, Congress was destroyed, and labor unions were outlawed.

Guyana?

Cheddi Jagan was a democratically-elected Marxist who turned his country into one of the richest of all Latin America. The U.S. overthrew him in 1964 and within 20 years Guyana was one of the poorest in the world.

Nicaragua?

Costa Rica?

The Dominican Republic?

El Salvadore?

All these countries have had democratically-elected Marxist presidents whose countries prospered under their rule. They were replaced by the U.S. with cruel, despotic governments who brutally oppressed the people.

You, Stormin Norman, are either ignorant or a liar.

[Michael De Panama]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 8:58 am on Dec. 21, 2002
"She's saying that Dubya raped her. His goons drugged her and her husband, and he might have raped her husband too."

Of course, this thread would not be complete without a contribution from Micheal De Panama. This is only a mild example of his dillusional rantings.

I was looking to see if I'd gotten the honor of having been quoted. Too bad Stormin Norman doesn't understand the definition of "ranting". You read the article, SN. You tell me what it's about. Did I get anything wrong, smart guy? Is she saying Dubya had a tea party with her? I know what you're getting at, Stormin. You think that if someone goes through the trouble of copying and pasting an interesting article, it automatically gives the responsibility to the poster to defend the article. You can't view anything outside of your superficial realm of leftists and rightwingers ranting, can you? Not that I expect you to understand what I mean.

We leftists should follow SN's example of providing content-rich, important, intelligent, thought-provoking arguments, sort of like this thread is.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Nevermind Stormin Moron still believes that Clinton had a teaparty with Monica Lewinsky."It depends on what you refer as sex"Guess who said this, you liar.

[ireallyhadablackout]

Quote: from Moskitto on 8:46 pm on Dec. 18, 2002
i think the most annoying thing is when someone supports/opposes something because some band does or because the US is involved, and they don't think about the situation,


true that, mosquitto, yet who can understand the words to most music and does not the writer use his own expression and message as he/she wishes?

the great thing about rock music is that it does and can influence the "majority" and that is a great thing!

"It's all about the music, really!"

[Stormin Norman]

"I was looking to see if I'd gotten the honor of having been quoted. Too bad Stormin Norman doesn't understand the definition of "ranting". You read the article, SN. You tell me what it's about. Did I get anything wrong, smart guy? Is she saying Dubya had a tea party with her? I know what you're getting at, Stormin. You think that if someone goes through the trouble of copying and pasting an interesting article, it automatically gives the responsibility to the poster to defend the article. You can't view anything outside of your superficial realm of leftists and rightwingers ranting, can you? Not that I expect you to understand what I mean.

We leftists should follow SN's example of providing content-rich, important, intelligent, thought-provoking arguments, sort of like this thread is."

Nice try Micheal. You posted that article, presenting it as fact without checking up on the validity. You did not post it and say "get a load of the bullshit claim made by the plaintiff in this case", or even, "what do you guys think of the validity of this story". In fact I believe you said "this is important stuff" and questioned why the main stream media was not following your own stupidity. You wanted something to bad to go wrong for Bush so badly that you hopped at the chance to smear his name without questioning your left wing sources. You made the mistake, not me.

Let me give you some advice, if you want to make Bush appear less able to effectively run the country, talk about something other than a figment of someone elses imagination. Talk about the border issue. Talk about his intention to grant amnesty and social security benefits to illegal immigrants. Talk about the State Department's continued practice of giving visitors from hostile nations visa protection without checking backgrounds. Talk about the airline bailouts. Talk about failure to wage war with Iraq in a coherent manner, by this I mean talk about him cow-towing to the United Nations (although I am not sure their isn't a brilliant strategy behind this). Talk about a number of things, but don't pull something out of your ass and call it macaroni.

The reason the Democrats fail to use legitimate issues that resonate with the American people lies in the fact that they are unwilling to do more than the minimal amount of action the Republicans have taken in these areas. The democrats actually want to do less with respect to issue of true importance to the survival of this nation. The Republicans are no better, they would have the overwhelming support of the citizens if they started to show spine and quit playing a defensive game. By negotiating with the appearance of weakness the opponents are able to pull them into the unpopular positions held by the losing party (dems). The result is that the American people grow tired and disillusioned when politics are being conducted in the same manner as the 1990's. I mean really, we have some serious business to attend to if we wish to remain a superpower. I have always thought that it would be the politicians who finally squandered the great wealth vested in this nation. We shall soon see what liberalism will do to this country. Unfortunately it will be the liberalism of a party who betrays the conservatism underlying their ideology.

[Stormin Norman]

"Nevermind Stormin Moron still believes that Clinton had a teaparty with Monica Lewinsky."It depends on what you refer as sex"Guess who said this, you liar."-CCCP

You are even dumber than I thought. This statement made shows your inability to recognize details that are inconsequential to the overall topic. You must score relatively low on reading comprehension tests.

Clinton's 'tea party' has nothing to do with this false accusation thrown out by those like Micheal De Panama and other leftists who fear using lies less than the truth in trying to undermine the president's credibility. Fact is they would have a decent platform if they would talk about some of the issues mentioned above, yet they know in truth the policies they promote would be more detrimental to American society. That is why they use lies and social cleavages to make themselves appear more desirable to people who lack the evaluative tools necessary to make a thoughtful decision. People who do not recognize what liberals are trying to accomplish deserve the results they will see materialize. Unfortunately, the rest of us living within this society are outnumbered by morons and we are ultimately unable to prevent them from making the same mistake they're never quite able to learn from. Oh well, good luck to you all in the ensuing chaos that is the future. I hope you develop more wits than you have shown me here.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Aaaaaaaaaaah fuck is he blind and ignorant. Stormin Moron still believes that Clinton had a teaparty.looool.

[Stormin Norman]

I don't think I need to point out how fucking stupid you are anymore. I will simply let you open your mouth and your words will speak for themselves. I could not accomplish the task of pointing out your ignorance as well as you do everyday.

[Lardlad95]

It's better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt

[Moskitto]

yeah, i don't have a problem with political music, but there's people who just repeat things a band says and don't do any research for their own ideas,

but the worst people are those who oppose something just because the US or annother western country supports it,

(Edited by Moskitto at 1:18 pm on Dec. 24, 2002)

[Stormin Norman]

You mean to tell me that your name, Moskitto, didn't originate in a Rage Against the Machine song. I am very dissappointed in your lack of Groupthink, Moskitto. Get with the trend. Zach is a greater man than Gandi.

[Moskitto]

seriously, the first time i heard about rage against the machine was when i joined this board,

the first time i heard them was when i went to sobeka and sam clarke said they were the greatest band ever,

i could tell you the origins of the name moskitto if you like,

there is a type of kayak called a Moskito which when i used to do kayaking i decided was a cool name so when i was looking for an internet pseudonym i used it, but i made a typo and used 2 ts,

[Michael De Panama]

Nice try, SN, but actually, all I did was copy and paste the article. You were the one who immediately held up your rightwinger defenses and took it as though I was presenting an argument. I didn't want to take a side either way on this issue, so I didn't say anything. As far as me saying "This is the president's penis we're talking about here. This is important stuff!"...
...yeah, actually, I was obviously being completely serious when I said that, wasn't I?

The president's penis is the first thing I have on my mind when I jump out of bed in the morning.

The rightwingers should be able to sympathize too, no? You people made such a scene about Bill Clinton getting a blowjob, you'd think Bill Clinton is getting paid to have a functional marriage, not run the country. Not that I like Clinton or anything, but if he gets his stupid scandals, I think it would only be fair that Bush gets his. Bush, after all, was a drunk, a druggie, and a criminal.

I hate having to spell these things out for you morons, but I never said that I believed or disbelieved the story, I just wanted the story to cause a little chaos. And no where did I make a mistake, smart guy.

Now, since you rightwingers are so pathetically predictable, I await you to respond by further educating me as to what my real intentions were, beneath my sinister commie lies. Capitalists seem to have a God-given knack for mind reading.

(Edited by Michael De Panama at 4:56 pm on Dec. 24, 2002)

[synthesis]

Gonna address my point, Stormin Norman?

[Stormin Norman]

"Yes Colorado and Denver are makers of weapons of mass destruction. Bush has it all wrong its not Iraq or North Korea or even India or Pakistan we need to worry about it it Colorado! Here are some links that tell about thier weapons of mass destruction"- a guy calling himself "truthaddict" that must be going through serious withdrawl.

[Stormin Norman]

"Well these idiots try to insult me! i don't feel insulted by some idiots with a lower IQ than mine! Especially with that avatar with that nigger! Communist Chris, Comrade Junichi and oconerr have chanleged me! These are people with higher IQ than Moskitto and Apocalypse When!"-Proud American

I thought this one was deserving a mention. To show you that I am fair and not one sided I even used one from someone who claims to be a capitalist. I think his comment undermined the claim that he was a capitalist and exposed his unfathomable ignorance. We might have a winner here.

If this guy were a capitalist he would place less importance on issues of race and more emphasis on the ideals one espouses. By admiting his racism, he demonstrates that he does not believe in such a merit based system. His ideology falls closer in line with the Nazi Party.

You guys, this has got to be the most hideous display of ignorance I have seen recently. Hopefully, we can later read about him in the Darwin Awards.

[Socialist Pig]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 11:34 am on Dec. 28, 2002

If this guy were a capitalist he would place less importance on issues of race and more emphasis on the ideals one espouses. By admiting his racism, he demonstrates that he does not believe in such a merit based system. His ideology falls closer in line with the Nazi Party.



Thats a little extreme. I'd say he's a spoilt son of a republican.

[Stormin Norman]

"Innocent people should die because what the government is doing. Then I am fucking happy all those people in the WTC are fucking dead. Hell, I'm going walk down to Ground Zero and piss on it."-ComradeJunichi

In response to that statement CrazyPete states:

"Tell me about a week and a half before and I'll join along with some fellow comrades from my town."

Just when I feel that I have found a winner, some idiots have to open their mouths. These posts speak for themselves. I would place these cretons lower than the previously noted rascist. I hope someone pisses in your guttermouths.

[Stormin Norman]

Your attempts to label the Party of Lincoln as rascists are also pretty ignorant, Socialist Pig. I think you are falling for a pretty crude political smear campaign aimed at labeling the Republicans as such. I know many REpublicans and they do not hold those views. Most of the racists I know don't bother to vote, and they read at an extremely low level. Racists and republicans represent two very different classes of people.

[Stormin Norman]

"I wish I could take a flight to Pyongyang, North Korea. I would like to have a talk with Kim Jung Il, and his party. I'd like to see if he knows anything about socialism. It would be great if I could go and talk to him, considering I'm probably the only South Korean communist."-Comrade Junichi

Good luck in your travels. Kim Jung II will slit your throat on the spot. If you do travel over there to speak with that despot I hope you go carrying some poison darts. Killing him is probably the only way you will get through to him.

Besides that very naive statement, the fact that you are a South Korean communists demonstrates the extent of your ignorance, Junichi. Didn't the communists kill any of your family members during the war? It seems that you should have a better understanding of the death communism entails if you are familiar with that region. Instead, you prefer to remain a useful idiot.

[truthaddict11]

SM, the point of that htread is to show how stupid it is to go in and bomb countries with "weapons of mass destruction" when they are made right here in the U$A.

[Stormin Norman]

And I thought it was good old fashion rabid anti-Americanism. Silly me. Seriously, you are comparing the U.S. to a rouge nation. We are probably the only county that has lived up to the 1972 Biological Weapons and Toxin Convention where over 140 nations signed a treaty that forbids the development, possession and use of biological and chemical weapons. Your comparison is flawed. You don't know your history, and apparently do not keep up on current events.

[Stormin Norman]

"I don't believe that there is a such thing as "God" and "Jezus". But the writer of the Bible must have been one of the first socialists."-CCCP

Another great from CCCP. Tell me fool, what aspect of Christianity lines up with socialist thinking? I can tell you are no theologian. The philosophy of Jesus and socialists are diametrically opposed.

[Sirion]

Another great from CCCP. Tell me fool, what aspect of Christianity lines up with socialist thinking? I can tell you are no theologian. The philosophy of Jesus and socialists are diametrically opposed.

Nice one, Stormin... You will then say that Jesus supported a capitalistic system (which is diametrically opposing socialism, at least almost) where the rich hoards good and live in extreme wealth, and tens of thousands die of hunger every day...
While it doesn't fit completely, I would say that the one sentence the whole bible tries to teach you, "You shall treat other people the way you want them to treat you (this is a bad translation. Anyone got the real quote?)" lies much closer to socialism than capitalism...

And, we are waiting for you to reply to Dyer Maker's (Zeppelin fan? ;) ) post.

(Edited by Sirion at 1:33 pm on Dec. 28, 2002)

[Stormin Norman]

"there is a type of kayak called a Moskito which when i used to do kayaking i decided was a cool name so when i was looking for an internet pseudonym i used it, but i made a typo and used 2 ts"

I figured it had to do with kayaking. You didn't quit, did you? I hope you didn't quit completely. You still take it out for your own amusement, don't you? I hope I didn't have anything to do with this. I just hope you are doing what you like in life. You have a web-site of your own, don't you? You should give me the address, I will check it out.

Sorry, but I don't think you belong anywhere near this thread. This thread is my own personal creation dedicated to forming a hall of fame for the most ignorant people on this board. Fortunately for you, I don't think you make the cut. You are by far one of the most respectable members of this board. I often find your inputs rather valuable. Imagine that. Even I can respect the opinions of a 'left winger' as long as they do not resemble any of the comments quoted in this thread.

[Stormin Norman]

"Why is 11-9 such a bad thing. Cause of the human sacrifice. The thing that struck america is their own fault. they started helping osama. Knowing of his ideas and knowing that someday he will attack america. Thats way years before he did his first bombing with al'qaida they had their eyes on him. And the human sacrifice isnt that much compared with the ridiculous numbers caused by the CIA and the american government. Afganistan(2million ppl)And here 2buildings were lost.(afganistan in his whole)"-CCCP

Damn CCCP, you probably have the most quotes in my ignorance hall of fame. You are definetely up there. Congratulations!

[Stormin Norman]

Nice one, Stormin... You will then say that Jesus supported a capitalistic system (which is diametrically opposing socialism, at least almost) where the rich hoards good and live in extreme wealth, and tens of thousands die of hunger every day...
While it doesn't fit completely, I would say that the one sentence the whole bible tries to teach you, "You shall treat other people the way you want them to treat you (this is a bad translation. Anyone got the real quote?)" lies much closer to socialism than capitalism...

'From each according to their ability to each according to their need", and "do unto others as you'd have them do unto you" are very different ideas. You don't propose that Jesus would advocate violently taking the riches of the wealthy, do you? Furthermore, the war in heaven was fought on the philosophical merits of free will versus determinism, the individual versus the collective. Jesus was on the side of individual choice, where as Lucifer took the deterministic viewpoint. It would be more accurate to classify socialism as a brand of Satanism than Christianity.


(Edited by Stormin Norman at 7:51 pm on Feb. 2, 2003)

[ComradeJunichi]

Hey, I'm in here! Heh, I didn't see it.

"Innocent people should die because what the government is doing. Then I am fucking happy all those people in the WTC are fucking dead. Hell, I'm going walk down to Ground Zero and piss on it."-ComradeJunichi

In response to that statement CrazyPete states:

"Tell me about a week and a half before and I'll join along with some fellow comrades from my town."

Just when I feel that I have found a winner, some idiots have to open their mouths. These posts speak for themselves. I would place these cretons lower than the previously noted rascist. I hope someone pisses in your guttermouths

Originally posted by: MaxB
One more thing to add: I hope those N. Koreans starve.

That's what I was replying to. I got pissed off, he wants to see innocent people die because the government is a piece of shit. And then I replied...do you think I really am happy all those people died in the WTC?

"I wish I could take a flight to Pyongyang, North Korea. I would like to have a talk with Kim Jung Il, and his party. I'd like to see if he knows anything about socialism. It would be great if I could go and talk to him, considering I'm probably the only South Korean communist."-Comrade Junichi

Good luck in your travels. Kim Jung II will slit your throat on the spot. If you do travel over there to speak with that despot I hope you go carrying some poison darts. Killing him is probably the only way you will get through to him.

Besides that very naive statement, the fact that you are a South Korean communists demonstrates the extent of your ignorance, Junichi. Didn't the communists kill any of your family members during the war? It seems that you should have a better understanding of the death communism entails if you are familiar with that region. Instead, you prefer to remain a useful idiot.

Obviously, I probably would not be able to talk to him. I said it in a heat of a moment.

None of my family members were killed during the Korean War that the two superpowers provoked. My mothers side ran down to the South, and my dads side went south. Why does being a South Korean communist mean I am ignorant? I do know the amount of deaths caused by war, not an ideology.

(Edited by ComradeJunichi at 4:31 pm on Dec. 28, 2002)

[Moskitto]

I figured it had to do with kayaking. You didn't quit, did you? I hope you didn't quit completely. You still take it out for your own amusement, don't you? I hope I didn't have anything to do with this. I just hope you are doing what you like in life. You have a web-site of your own, don't you? You should give me the address, I will check it out.

I stopped doing Kayaking as in Veras Larsen - http://www.plastexcomposite.com/Final_A_K1-1000m_M_-_Veras-Larsen_NOR.JPG

Now I do Canoeing as in Gyorgi Kolonicz - http://www.plastexcomposite.com/sevilla2002/Final%20A%20C1-500m%20M%20-%20G.Kolonics%20HUN%2002.jpg

My website address is in my profile, someone was impersonating you on it, but he made 1 crucial mistake in his impersonations.


(Edited by Moskitto at 4:23 pm on Dec. 28, 2002)

[Moskitto]

Oh NO, Kolonicz is sponsored by McDonalds. Maybe one of Dittmar would be better, but he looks weird without his glasses on.

[Stormin Norman]

My website address is in my profile, someone was impersonating you on it, but he made 1 crucial mistake in his impersonations.

Now I am curious. Could you provide a link to that thread? I want to see how good of a representation it actually was. Thanks.

[Moskitto]

he made many posts but the really funny one about free speech was deleted by one of the other moderators, but here is a list of all the posts http://www.fightcapitalism.net/users/moski...15;user=Moonbow (http://www.fightcapitalism.net/users/moskitto/forum/index.php?board=;action=usersrecentposts;userid=15 ;user=Moonbow), 116 onwards are ones pretending to be you, can you spot his error?

(Edited by Moskitto at 5:16 pm on Dec. 28, 2002)

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Stormin Moron is so right. Jezus didn't come on earth to fight the Roman Captalism. He didn't give fish and bread to others to be socialistic. He did it because it's the only way outcompetite the enemy company's. Yup "God" was the first industry magnat and Jezus the first PR guy:wink:

You probaly didn't even read my final statement, can't be handled by your small captalist brain. No more than 1 text a day.:cool:

LoL you are stupid

[Socialist Pig]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 11:52 am on Dec. 28, 2002
Your attempts to label the Party of Lincoln as rascists are also pretty ignorant, Socialist Pig. I think you are falling for a pretty crude political smear campaign aimed at labeling the Republicans as such. I know many REpublicans and they do not hold those views. Most of the racists I know don't bother to vote, and they read at an extremely low level.

I take it you've done extensive research to discover this? Or maybe you had a conversation with a couple of red necks down at the pub? You can't judge all people simply because of a few people you know. I know several racists and acording to standardized testing, they are fairly intelligent. It's sad that such intelligent people are so misguided.


Racists and republicans represent two very different classes of people.

So you can't be republican and racist?

[Anonymous]

http://www.fightcapitalism.net/users/moski...ay;threadid=486 (http://www.fightcapitalism.net/users/moskitto/forum/index.php?board=16;action=display;threadid=486)

Here is one of the threads.

(Edited by Dark Capitalist at 4:54 am on Dec. 29, 2002)


(Edited by Dark Capitalist at 4:56 am on Dec. 29, 2002)

[synthesis]

And, we are waiting for you to reply to Dyer Maker's post.

Strangely, he has managed to talk a whole lot of shit without any intelligence or maturity whatsoever, but still cannot come up with the facts to refute the fact that the U.S. government is essentially a big fucking Mafia, who sends all the Communists to sleep with the fishes and forces all their people to work as prostitutes (in a metaphorical sense - for the most part. (http://www.csis.org/pubs/prospectus/00summerSusak.html))


http://members.aol.com/tonywestok/private/godfath1.gif
^ George W. Bush ^

(Edited by DyerMaker at 6:40 am on Dec. 29, 2002)

[Stormin Norman]

That person was too stupid to pull off an accurate representation of me. I spotted many errors that would lead any reasonable person to assume that the posts were, in fact, the work of an imposter. Good call Moskitto, but I don't think it took a rocket scientist to figure out that moron was not me.

I think the only person who might have any capacity to mimick my personality on-line might be my girl friend. I doubt even she would be able to portray me. She has not read enough of my posts. She falls closer to the left than myself, and would probably leave me if she knew some of my opinions. When I went to Canada with her, she was disgusted by my hatred of the bums. I really had to tone it down so I could continue to get laid. I think the idea that really turned her off was my plan to catch 50-100 of the bums in giant nets and force them to scrub their piss off of the streets.

[Stormin Norman]

"Joon, you underestimate Bush's arrogance. He don't need no stinkin U.N. We gonna kill us some sand-niggers."-Lefty

Very deep, Lefty! Your political analysis is most certainly invaluable.

"I typed and printed out some anti-war posters and handed them out to people at my school. They were all torn down, and they weren't offensive or anything. What can I do? I'm thinking just plaster them with tape."-Lefty

Ha! Ha! Sounds like you are in the minority at your school. Sounds like the rest of the student body remain model citizens, while you continue with your communist stupidity. If your words about Bush and his desire to kill Arabs is any indication of the kind of work you put into making your posters, it's no wonder they were torn down. People have a limited capacity for dealing with ignorance.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 3:56 am on Dec. 30, 2002)

[synthesis]

People have a limited capacity for dealing with ignorance.

Great spirits have always encountered opposition from weak minds
-Albert Einstein,
A much smarter man than you

[Stormin Norman]

"This is what holds the world back, the white supremecist like you SN."-Umoja

Preposterous! Umoja tries to label me as a white supremacist for my claim that we ought to strategically bomb North Korean installations capable of manufacturing nuclear weapons. This is typical of the left. Trying to censure somebody by labeling them as a racist. This has been a pretty successful tactic of the left, but it will not work here. My motives are not racially based. My desire to destroy North Korean nuclear capabilities has nothing to do with the fact that they are oriental. It has everything to do with the fact they they are threatening my country. If the Germans were acting the same way views would remain consistent. I would call for the destruction of their capabilities. Your attempts to discredit me are a failure. Even the most vocal opponents of mine would vouch for me. My motives are never racially motivated. I hate racists as much or more than I hate communists. Thanks for wasting my time. I should not have to answer such baseless accusations, but I will not let you label me as something I am not. Next time try to criticize my viewpoints instead of calling me dirty names.

[Stormin Norman]

"We should not claim that a fetus is a human life. Remember, in roman times, one wasnt considered human until he or she could walk. Killing or abandoning children before that time would be acceptable."-Lysenko

Where do I start on this little jewel? Let's start at the begining. Lysenko says that we should not make the claim that a fetus is human life. What would you call it then. Science has proven that all animals produce offspring that share there genetic coding. That is why fish produce fish, cats produce cats, and humans produce human offspring. Science and common sense would dictate that a human embryo is in fact human. What a topsy turvy world we would live in if this were false.

Lysenko then points to the Roman practice as infanticide as reason to ignore basic human decency. What are you suggesting, that we should revert back to the brutality of the era? I would like to think that we have progress as a species since that time period. Next thing Lysenko will be telling us is that we should revert back to the violent practices of the crusaders, rather than the current missionary work that is being conducted by Christians nowdays. What a fool!

Congratulations! You have found yourself in Stormin Norman's Hall of Fame of Ignorant Statements.

[Moskitto]

there's 2 forms of descrimination, direct and indirect, i don't see how anyone could accuse you of direct descrimination, but someone might be able to accuse you of indirect descrimination somehow,

[Stormin Norman]

How?

[j]

Hey, SN, why did you not respond to my post? In my opinion, my post should have ended this lengthy thread. I have been away for awhile, the holidays and such, and now the total pages for this thread are up to 10. Why no response? The part I would like a response to is your creating a thread to make fun of ignorant people on this board when your signature is ingorant itself.

j

[j]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 8:45 am on Dec. 23, 2002
" Your right CCCP, every third world immigrant has a god given right to come to the U.S. and deplete the welfare resources and contribute to the severe budgetary problems that persist in virtually every state. If that is the kind of 'sound' economic and social policy you support, then you need help. Not to mention, the is an incredible health risk associated with letting immigration go unchecked. Many of the diseases we thought we had rendered insignificant are making come-backs. Many of them particulary resistant strains. The correlation between unchecked immigration and the overstressed health services sector is difficult to ignore. Fact is, we have developed quite a problem, and the U.S. can not continue with its current trend if it plans to remain a 1st world country. I would once again sight the left's notions of unchecked immigration as another one of their ideals that will bring great destruction upon the well being of the citizens who they claim to champion.


This is a little harsh. If you remember the Europeans brought many diseases to this country dating back to the first settlers.

Illegal immigration and an overstressed health care system are correlated only to a small extent. There are many other factors that stress the health care system such as drug/alcohol abuse and domestic violence.

The severe budgetary crisis that 49 of 50 states are experiencing or will experience in a few days is not due wholly to illegal immigration. As a matter of fact, I don't know anyone in government who has made such a claim. The budgetary crisis has much more to do with the federal government not giving the states as much money. Of course you remember Georgie's tax cuts back in 2000. Hell, I remember getting a $300 check in the mail from Georgie himself. I was happy when I got it but did not realize the impact it would have. That's the problem with tax cuts, everyone loves them and then complains about cutting services.

For example, in MA the cities and town are getting their state money slashed by like 20% or so. In turn the towns and cities need to cut teachers, police, and firefighters. You cut these needed services and the children don't learn, the criminals get away, and your house if more likely to burn down. These cuts will in turn increase social problems and the rift between those that have and those that don't. Is this what it is to be a compassionate conservative?

j

[Moskitto]

you could in theory say that because you support a system which has rich people and poor people and the poor people tend to be black then you're supporting indirect descrimination, but you could get most people that way,

[Stormin Norman]

That simply is not true, Moskitto. Fact is, we do not live under any ascribed status. You can determine the extent of your own success in a capitalist society. Bad choices yield losses. Good choices yield gains. Opportunity is up for grabs. Anyone who wishes may partake. If a disporportionate amount of black people remain poor it is largely due to a general victim mentality they clinge to.

Just last weekend, I was in a shady part of town. A group of young black men passed me and stared me down like I was their problem. I recognized one of them as somebody I had work with long ago. We used to have candid conversations and there was never any bad blood between the two of us. I think he also recognized me, but ignored that fact due to the company he was keeping.

I was the victim of racism. They saw me as part of the white majority that keeps them from getting anywhere. In that situation I would be willing to bet their problem was more rooted in the fact that they walk around with chips on their shoulders and see success as a bone somebody should throw them.

The way one conducts themselves in society has everything to do with how far they get. Many of today's youth have been largely influenced by MTV and rap/pop music. Although this culture offers intertainment, it should not remain a template for how people should act. If you live a life defined by drugs and violence, you should not expect to be taken seriously in a society of professionals. This truth goes for anybody.

I was a little depressed that an old acquintance would treat me with just disdain based upon my skin color. I think the problem of racism is far more prevalent among blacks than it is whites. Perhaps this is not always true, but it has been in my experience. I have noticed myself being treated as an enemy by black people, but I have never witnessed any one of my friends treat a member of a different race as anything less than human. If we truly want to deal with the issue of racism, the rules must be applied to everyone in the same fashion. We must quit focusing on the divisions, and we must quit using societal cleavages as a political end. I have heard many prominent black figures say this very thing, and I have seen them get shouted down on the college campuses. Those figures that believe, as I do, that one's achievements are more important than whatever race one happens to be born into, are the leaders that I respect the most.

If placing importance on strength of mind and achievement makes me a classist, call me that. I would argue that claim as well, because one's true value can never be measured monetarily. But do not make the mistake of calling me a racist in any way, shape, or form. As you can tell from my time here, I hate those who choose to remain ignorant. Those who are stuck in a racial mindset are by far some of the most ignorant people I have had the misfortune of meeting.

If you would like, we can further explore the possibility that I am a classist. It's up to you. I would be happy to address it here.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 10:03 pm on Dec. 31, 2002)

[synthesis]

We must quit focusing on the divisions

That's the point of Socialism!

[Stormin Norman]

Quite the opposite, Dyermaker. Socialism is the culmination of those divisive feelings leading to a point where people feel justified in looting what does not rightfully belong to them. It is murder and mayhem to the power of ten. It is Maoism, Stalinism, Nazism, collectivism, and classism. It is the most destructive force this world has yet to see. It is an abomination that must be fought tooth and nail.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 9:30 pm on Dec. 31, 2002)

[synthesis]

As always, you talk a lot of shit, but fail to provide any evidence that any of your bullshit is truth. You say socialism is equal to Stalinism, Maoism, and Nazism; the latter proves your title to be correct, Stormin Moron, as Nazism has always been an opponent of socialism, as is everything else you listed.

You are truly and irreconcilably ignorant, secure in your lies because you profit from them. What's the saying? The truth is as sunlight is to vampires, and if you choose to remain in the dark, you are likely a vampire. That's all you are, capitalist, a filthy fucking bloodsucker, and if hell exists it is surely your final destination.

[Stormin Norman]

Tell me then, what method of allocating resources did the German's employ? As for the rest of your statement, baseless accusations.

You have no way of knowing how much or how little I benefit from the market system. I have never disclosed my income on this website.

Your continued ignorance further demonstrates your lack of an ability to learn. Perhaps that is why I have featured you in this thread a number of times. Your have a genuine gift of spewing pure garbage, everytime you speak. It's almost amusing to me, but then I remember that you take yourself seriously. You are definetely top ten when it comes to the dipshits that congregate on this board.

[synthesis]

Perhaps that is why I have featured you in this thread a number of times.

Look closer. My only involvement in this thread is me calling you out on baseless statements you made that I am STILL waiting for a response to!

You have no way of knowing how much or how little I benefit from the market system. I have never disclosed my income on this website.

It doesn't matter. If you still stick with capitalism after being fucking crushed in debates so many times, you must profit from it.

Your have a genuine gift of spewing pure garbage, everytime you speak

Funny, how I actually back up my "garbage" with genuine historical evidence while you make up shit about how Marxism is never democratic without having any knowledge on the subject whatsoever.

Tell me then, what method of allocating resources did the German's employ?

Socialism. Germany was very well off under the Nazis, economically speaking - no one can deny that. Hitler was extremely popular in Germany.

But socialism is NEVER authoritarian, much less to the extent Hitler was! Plus, National Socialism is based entirely upon racial eugenics, which are an atrocity! NO libertarian/democratic socialist (every socialist besides the Nazis) would ever support racial purity enforcement, let alone advocate the slaughter of Jews, who created our movement in the first place!

Also, in case you didn't notice, the Nazis were Nationalists - the farthest you're going to get from the socialists in America on the political spectrum. The Nationalists have always sought to end immigration, while most socialists fight for immigration, and immigrants' rights.

It is you who has consistently invented history for your own gain, you who knows nothing of the word of Marx, you who pretends like he knows what the fuck he's talking about when he doesn't. You are a liar.

[Stormin Norman]

It appears that I was mistaken when I claimed I had featured you in this thread. I remembered seeing your name, and considering the number of ignorant things you say on a daily basis I assumed that I had quoted you here. I am sorry about that, it is something I will have to remedy in the future.

As for your attempt to try to distinguish between Nazi Germany and a socialist country like say the Soviet Union, the only real difference lies in the reason they chose to kill people. The Germans preferred race as their basis, the Bolsheviks like political and class affiliation. Murder is murder.

Like I said earlier, this kind of hostility was derived from divisions within their respective societies. The only way for a socialist regime to rid the people of these distinctions is by mass murdering those who present a threat to the new regime, and then generating an overall atmosphere of terror. From Tiananmen square, to the purges, to the Nazi killing of professors and church leaders; the desire is easily recognized.

Absolute dominion over the masses is the ultimate goal of the corrupt people who get their start through looting businesses, and allow their crime spree to end with piles of bodies. Perhaps you are the fool who believes that socialism was proposed for any other reason than this. If so, you deserve the hell on earth you're an accomplice in creating. Your are the useful idiot who will not get your share of the spoils when the murderers decide to divy it up. You are the one that will either survive at the end of a leash, or possibly the one who gets the shank in the back as gratification for your aid in the rampant destruction. Where ever you end up, will will always remain the fool who prefers slavery and death to life and liberty. You are a particularly nauseating breed of lowlife.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 12:59 am on Jan. 1, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

Socialism. Germany was very well off under the Nazis, economically speaking - no one can deny that. Hitler was extremely popular in Germany

Yeah I am sure the economic success of the German's had everything to do with sound economic policy and nothing to do the nationalistic emphasis on self sacrifice for the good of the nation-state. Furthermore, I understand that they, like China, had a rather large pool of slaves they could work to death without having to worrying about that burdensome chore of feeding them. Yes, the German's were most efficient at killing people.

[Stormin Norman]

Back to ignorant statements.

"What is truly shameful is the lack of real arguments bushyguy has to start a war against Iraq. Saddam oponed the doors of his country to UN inspectors who found no evidence of alleged nuclear wepons. Additionally, one of these inspectors said that if the US Government has concrete evidence against Iraq they should deliver this critical info."-Larissa

Obviously you have no clue about the threat America is currently facing. I wonder what kind of agents those 5 Arab men who snuck in from Canada have. I fear it is going to take an epidemiological disaster in order for people like you to take this thing seriously. I pray there is no release at Times Square tonight.

[j]

OK, there you have it. You wanted to know how you could be racist, its right there, my friend.

You see, the ONLY reason those five people were posted on the news is because they are Arab. And now-a-days Arab=Terrorist. If the five people were Irish we wouldn't see it on the news. You can't tell me there are not Irish terrorists. Timothy McVeigh was quite certainly a terrorist and he is one of "us!" You can not stereotype people like you and the media have. Yes there are Arab terrorists, but there are also Irish, German, and American terrorists as well.

We didn't see 9-11 coming. So don't tell me these other groups are of no threat! You see, terrorism is a despicable technique (even though Trotsky defended it), but happens to have a positive result for the perpretrators of it. We have threats from everywhere here in the US. We pressure the rest of the world to believe as we believe, we act as cultural imperialists.

What most people don't get is that we have BEEN at war for some time. Our government has waged war on countless occassions (some noble--Nazi's and some not so noble--Nicaragua). 9-11 was the war we waged coming back to kick us in the ass. There, I said it!! You can not wage war on the world and not expect it to be re-visited on yourself. That is the lesson we should have learned from 9-11. (Now for the disclaimer--this is in no way support for what happened on 9-11 nor is it a justifaction for it. What happened was horrible. I believe the firefighters, police, volunteers, and others acted heroically and I have much respect for their actions).

You see, I could step out my door and trip on a crack vile. They peddle it just down the street. Poor people struggle, they struggle everyday. The system does keep these people oppressed. It is documented that there have been policies of racism and classism and the establishment of the "ghetto." You can not expect people to rise above their situation when they do not have enough food, shelter, or medicine. That is the problem with America today. The system perpetuates poverty. There is also a term called "learned helplessness." It means that because you see no one around you improving, you tend to feel your situation is helpless. You can not see beyond the next meal. These are the issues of poverty. This is the problem with America. This is the problem with capitalism.

You, my friend, perpetuate ideas of free will and tell people to pull their bootstraps. These are all myths we tell our children. We need a just and equitable system where EVERYONE is given the same chance. You CAN NOT tell me that everyone is this country is given the same chance.

I sometimes listen to this guy, Jay Severin, on talk radio in Boston. He is a real conservative asshole and he pisses me off, but I still listen cause he is a reasonable intelligent guy. Now, he said to a caller, pick five newborns of reasonable intelligence and I will do the same. Now give my five a private education and give yours a public education and whoever gets the most students into Harvard wins a million dollars. Jay's answer would be that he would win with the private school. You know, he's probably right. Now is that just and equitable? Hell no!!! That is giving opportunities to those who have money.

I'm sorry this is so long and kind of out of context, but you my friend are the biggest perpetuator of ignorance on this board save CI. So don't pull out random instances of ignorance when YOUR WHOLE PHILOSOPHY IS IGNORANT!!!

j

[Stormin Norman]

"You see, the ONLY reason those five people were posted on the news is because they are Arab."

You fucking idiot! They are relying on intelligence data and the Canadian authorities. If being Arab were the criteria, they would have rounded up all my neighbors as terrorist suspects. Fuck you!

I am sure if we had reason to believe we were about to be attacked by Irish, German, Indian, Nigerian, or any other kind of terrorist the feds would post their pictures too. You're right. Terrorist come in many forms. What is your point again?
You think I am dumb enough to forget about this. Obviously it is the security of the American people that I care about. I don't give a God Damn what fucking color they are!


You see, I could step out my door and trip on a crack vile. They peddle it just down the street. Poor people struggle, they struggle everyday. The system does keep these people oppressed. It is documented that there have been policies of racism and classism and the establishment of the "ghetto." You can not expect people to rise above their situation when they do not have enough food, shelter, or medicine. That is the problem with America today. The system perpetuates poverty. There is also a term called "learned helplessness." It means that because you see no one around you improving, you tend to feel your situation is helpless. You can not see beyond the next meal. These are the issues of poverty. This is the problem with America. This is the problem with capitalism.

Would you like to whine me another river about the crackhead who spent all his money on crack and didn't have enough food or medicine to go around?

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 7:01 am on Jan. 1, 2003)

[Moskitto]

I wouldn't say that about you myself, i gave it as an example of how someone else could pin labels onto you, sorry for the misunderstanding,

[j]

I'm talking about illegal arab immigration not arabs already in this country legally.

From what I have gathered from the news, they are NOT connected with terrorism in anyway.

You also seemed to miss my point entirely. When I was talking about crack peddling I was looking at it from a broader perspective. Yes there are "crackheads" who spend money on drugs when they should be providing for their families. But what about the system that makes this situation possible? What motivates a person to use crack or any other drug? I would say that 8 or 9 times out of ten it is to escape reality. That reality is poverty. Poverty is perpetuated by a capitalist system. So no, I won't whine to you about anything. I am merely asking you take a deeper look at a problem. Although, you seem not to really care.

And why must you throw out insults. I merely called you ignorant. And you are even more ignorant for posting a thread about ignorance.

We should have reason to believe that others will attack us. We need to realize that we are part of the WORLD. We can not go about acting as if our shit don't stink!!

j

[Stormin Norman]

Oh heaven forbid, we wouldn't want to offend the people who visit this nation illegally for the purpose of doing it harm. Have you heard the threat assessments surrounding these suspects, J? I think it pretty safe to say that we should find them and detain them before somebody launchs another anthrax attack. Jeez, Louis, I thought I was joking when I said you guys were suicidal. You are absurd!

[Stormin Norman]

"But what about the system that makes this situation possible."

You mean the system where they leave their house, go down to the corner, and spend their money on crack instead of food. Yeah, free-will is a real ***** isn't it?

[j]

Show me the evidence of these men being linked to terrorism. Show me the evidence I will back down about this point.

Is it free will to be born poor, go to substandard schools and be taught you are inferior?

Again, dummy, take a BROADER look at the picture. Or don't you care about poor people?

j

[Stormin Norman]

"Freedom of speech won't feed my children"

Apparently El Brujo thought this was such an inciteful statement that he used it as his signature. However unrelated the two things are, one thing is for certain. The lack of freedom of speech will almost certainly ensure that you and your children starve. Totalitarian regimes that place emphasis on restricting speech among other things, have a notorious record of using people's need for food as a further instrument in their oppression of the people.

I think any moron could pick a better signature. The importance that El Brujo places on this quote demonstrates his confounding ignorance, and deserves a place in the Hall of Fame of Ignorant Statements.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 5:50 pm on Jan. 2, 2003)

[synthesis]

considering the number of ignorant things you say on a daily basis I assumed that I had quoted you here.

Things that I say?! You STILL haven't responded to my democracy post, you fuckin' moron!

As for your attempt to try to distinguish between Nazi Germany and a socialist country like say the Soviet Union, the only real difference lies in the reason they chose to kill people. The Germans preferred race as their basis, the Bolsheviks like political and class affiliation. Murder is murder.

I don't defend Nazi Germany, and I never will. Nazis killed the people who created our movement and it ends there.

As for the Soviet Union, it was Stalin, for the most part, who killed his opposition by labeling the libertarian left as "right-wing" and had them all executed. I don't defend Stalin, either, and consider him worse than Hitler.

Neither of these were Marxist, anyways.

Where ever you end up, will will always remain the fool who prefers slavery and death to life and liberty. You are a particularly nauseating breed of lowlife.

As if the fucking totalitarian regimes your precious capitalism created in Chile, Iraq, Haiti, Afghanistan, Cuba, Greece, and Nicaragua possessed life and liberty!

Your point of Nazi Germany having slaves is moot, by the way, since all capitalist systems exploit slave labor in the forms of sweatshops, or more overt slavery occasionally, such as in Israel.

Capitalist systems that do not have the benefit of slave labor fail miserably, such as in the aforementioned Chile or Haiti.

You are a particularly nauseating breed of lowlife.

Touche, you slavedriving piece of shit.

Totalitarian regimes that place emphasis on restricting speech among other things, have a notorious record of using people's need for food as a further instrument in their oppression of the people.

Such regimes as you mentioned include those of Somoza, Trujillo, Stroechner, Pinochet, Sese Soko...

You mean the system where they leave their house, go down to the corner, and spend their money on crack instead of food.

The same crack your system created and actively sells to further force the oppressed onto their knees.

P.S. I, for one, don't think you're a racist, I just think you're an idiot.

[Stormin Norman]

"The same crack your system created and actively sells to further force the oppressed onto their knees."

These words definitely belong in this thread, the hall of fame. REcently, you claim to back up all of your trash with facts. Let's see you find evidence that the CIA invented crack as a method to oppress the poor. I have heard this mentioned by conspiracy theorists and ignorant folks alike, but I have never seen one shred on evidence to support this claim. It remains a lie often used by the left to discredit the U.S. government. It is pure propaganda, with no basis in fact. You, my friend, are the idiot, liar.

[synthesis]

I'm glad you asked.


http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciad...eney-drugs.html (http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciadrugs/bush-cheney-drugs.html)

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciad.../factsheet.html (http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciadrugs/factsheet.html)

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/pand...s-targeted.html (http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/pandora/blacks-targeted.html)

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciad...tness_list.html (http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciadrugs/witness_list.html)

http://www.duke.edu/~ldbaker/clippings/da1.html

http://www.duke.edu/~ldbaker/clippings/da2.html

http://www.duke.edu/~ldbaker/clippings/da3.html

http://www.naturalhealthholistic.com/whiteout.html

http://www.finalcall.com/features/cia-dope2.html

http://www.lindesmith.org/library/kawell2.cfm

(Edited by DyerMaker at 7:53 am on Jan. 2, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

It is no secret that the CIA had involvment in the drug trade. Wars cost money, as do black operations. Drug money offers an excellent source of slush funds necessary for operations that must remain classified, operations where congressional oversight might compromise the objective. However, this fact, and the claim that the CIA invented crack and directly targeted the black community for destruction are two separate claims. One remains grounded in the CIA's own admission, the other is pure bullshit conjured up by liberals in another attempt to capitalize on societal cleavages.

The claim that the CIA invented crack in the 1980's and directly targeted black communities seems childish, at best. Fact is, anyone could make crack, it is not a hard procedure. To be factual, crack was discovered by drug traffickers in the 1970's who used the foil test method to measure the concentration of cocaine hydrochloride in a delivery. There goes the bullshit idea that it was invented by the CIA in the 1980's. Futhermore, the crack phenomenon is not only a black problem. Crack cocaine has exploded to every racial and socio-economic demographic imaginable. To suggest that this is a black problem is absurd. I suggest anyone making that claim look at the statistical data.

Beside not backing up your assertion, you further proved how difficult it can be to find a reputable source that supports Gary Webb's story. After the Mercury News published his "Dark Alliance" series, it was picked apart and refutted by all the major newspapers, including the very liberal L.A. Times. Since then the Webb's credibilty has been destroyed, and the Mercury News has removed the original story from its archives. They have made an attempt to rectify the situation that they created by sloppy journalism. Not one of the sources you list, is considered to be reputable news source, as is so often the case when dealing with the leftists on this board. Show me some actual documentation that the CIA invented crack and deliberately targeted the black population in L.A. for the purpose of its destruction. After all, isn't that the claim you are making? Hell show me one reputable news source that presents this idea as truth.

[synthesis]

I'll get on it.

Meanwhile, you can get around to addressing all my other points you've neglected.

[Stormin Norman]

Your attempts to claim that there ever was a democratic communist country, which was actually democratic is laughable. I know this to be a fallacy, and do not wish to delve into the history of Chile. I believe there are more important topics of discussion. However, I suppose that I can get around to investigating exactly how democratic those countries you listed actually were before U.S. intervention. You might be right, but I doubt it. Remember, Saddam Hussien was recently re-elected by an overwhelming majority. I surely hope you would not consider this to be an exercise in democracy. I am sure there was al reason we intervened. I will look it up, but don't expect me to defend one of the United States's foreign policy mistakes. I am smart enough to know that not everything the U.S. does is justified. Therefore, I don't think your current strategy will have the desired effect you want.


(Edited by Stormin Norman at 1:25 am on Jan. 4, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

"Why would i want to argue in endless circles of what kind of "government" to have?, how much , or how to fund it,or what kind of economic theories or military/foriegn policy to favor.ZZZZZZZZZZ. its just pointless because its doesnt exist"-peoplenotprofits

Should we expect anything more from a person who uses "people not profits" as their name. That statement is the true rallying cry of the idiot who has no concept of the world around them. I usually hear this bit of wisdom coming from people who call themselves socialists, but fail to investigate what that term really means. This person demonstrates the type of blind ignorance that I dedicated this thread to exposing. Your legions are always one-uping themselves when it comes to demonstrating their stupidity. Enough said.

[synthesis]

You [ sic ] attempts to claim that there ever was a democratic communist country, which was actually democratic is laughable.

On the contrary, your attempts to prove me wrong are completely pathetic and without any basis whatsoever. Perhaps you can add this next little golden egg to your collection here.

I know this to be a fallacy, and do not wish to delve into the history of Chile.

Wow. You know it's wrong, so you're not even going to investigate it? You just know it's wrong, there is no possible chance it is right, no way, no how, not a chance in hell whatsoever?

Wow. You are an idiot.

Therefore, I don't think your current strategy will have the desired effect you want.

I am proving the hypocrisy of the capitalist claim that "communism ends in butchery," because that's all capitalism ever leads to anyways. America alone has killed more than 10,000,000 innocents worldwide, not counting the obvious genocide of the Natives and the indirect genocide of the Blacks in Africa.

[Stormin Norman]

I said I did not really care about the history of Chile, but I am sure I made it quite clear that I would investigate your claims. I for one don't wish to hold an ignorant opinion. You brought something to my attention they may or may not be true, and I plan to check out the validity of the claim. This is how I am. If you are right, I will admit that I was wrong.

However, you need to give me time to research the topic. Okay, fuckface. If I do not answer you in a considerable length of time then you have the right to berate me. For now, you are making yourself look foolish by expecting me to have an answer about something that could take a considerable length of time to look into. I for one, do not formulate my opinions based upon what a couple irreputable web-sites claim. I will go to the library read some books and get back with you. Do you accept those terms? If not, then I do not wish to conduct any further conversations with you.

I must tell you that I am currently looking into Chiapas revolution and Mexican history. Som, a member of this board asked me a direct question about it first. He has also shown me more respect in our dealings with each other. I have an idea. Why don't you and I operate on a foundation of mutual respect from now on? I am sure our conversations will become more fruitful.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 8:17 am on Jan. 2, 2003
It is no secret that the CIA had involvment in the drug trade. Wars cost money, as do black operations. Drug money offers an excellent source of slush funds necessary for operations that must remain classified, operations where congressional oversight might compromise the objective.

Do you support it?

[RedComrade]

"Obviously you have no clue about the threat America is currently facing"


Obviously mr norman you have no idea how to solve it, first of all terrorism has always exsisted and always will. Throwing money and lead at the problem is just making it worse. History teaches that responding with force to terror just increases the terror and this fact dates back to the roman empire and hasnt changed a bit. For instance take Iraq, Hussein being a secular president and member of the Baath party(secular "socialists") is not realalistically going to give arms to a group of fundamentalist terrorists who want a damn cleric in place of him in power is he? Furthermore al-queda has strong links with Sadaams biggest enemy the kurdish resistance. Sadaam whose not completely dumb is not going to be giving weapons to his enemies. However if you try and take Sadaam out hes losing the war and knows hes going to lose power any way but knows if he hooks mr al-queda up with a lil botullinum or anthrax and theyll use it to kill sum americans hes much more likely to consort with terrorists. This so called war will serve no purpose other than to destablaize the region and triple the terrorist threat. Sadaam knows he cant win a conventional war and will resort to an unconventional war of terror and urban war which is a war certain to have much greater repercussions on everyone than if the man was kept under containment with a permaneant weapons inspection team on the ground to keep the peace. Just as north koreas facilities WERE monitored there is no reason iraqi facilities could not be put under permaneant surveillance. If you had key weapons facilities and resource sites under constant surveillance its not realalistic to say that hell be able to keep producing these weapons or ever produce enough to be a signifigant threat. Also going after Iraq who has no nukes and giving N Korea a break when they have nukes is further evidence to support the claims by anti-war supporters that this war is for oil and domination in a key strategic region that is lacking in the ally dept. Plus the military intelligent assets being deverted from N. korea will allow the koreans to prepare and produce more bargaining chips(nukes+such) worsening the situation their and increasing the likelyhood of a compromise that is heavily favorable to the N korean cause. Also all of the army reserves in the workforce being called to service will do nothing to help our economic woes either. It is you who have no idea of the NATURE of the threat were facing friend, the real cause is the war the affect will be a tremendous threat both economically and security-wise.

[RedComrade]

Ignore the damned emoticon I dont know why it showed up

[RedComrade]

""I'm actually pro democracy as are all leftists."

That's probably the best one yet."

Norman by pointing out this statement as ignorant you are not only exposing your own ignorance but you are also offering a superb insight into the mind of a right-winger. A right winger such as yourself sees such a statement and knowing that your definition of leftist is someone who is anti-democracy laughs and assumes your definition is correct and a universal truth. However by doing so you expose YOUR ignorance and hypocrisy for extending your perspective to everything but at the same time refusing to recognize and respect that as an individual his definition of leftist is someone who is pro democracy and that you must be pro democracy to be a leftist. You cant tell him what his definition of leftist is and as you attempt to by saying that it is different than what he said you open yourself up to the laughter and ridicule that any rational individual would give to someone who claims he's pyschic as you obviously claim to be considering you think you know what a leftist is in that mans eyes

(Edited by RedComrade at 6:25 am on Jan. 4, 2003)

[RedComrade]

"P.S. Zach de Lacucaracha should be jailed for giving money to guerilla groups in South America. He is a supporter of terrorism"

Since when do guerilla troops combating a government become terrorists? Terrorists are those who target the civilian population with violence so that they can advance whichever cause they are fighting for in the power arena? Which guerilla groups are you talking about specifically but if they are exclusively guerillas rebelling against the government and the forces backing the government (the us for example) that by no means makes them terrorists. Ive noticed that lately any independence movement that uses force against government forces is being listed as terrorists (example FLZN etc.). Since I will not be as ignorant as you mr norman and assume that you have the same defintion of terrorist as me please define terrorist. Explain the correlation between guerilla freedom fighter and terrorist. After all it was a ragtag band of revolutionaries using guerilla tactics that won this countries independence and guerillas around the world continue to be the militant side of a movement for freedom and justice. Dont go so far as to label a guerilla as a terrorist considering you owe your country to guerilla warriors.

[RedComrade]

""American Impearlism"

It's not the spelling that I am making fun of, it's the actual claim. "

Websters New World Dictionary defines Imperialism as :The policy of seeking to dominate the affairs of weaker countries. By this definition America is by far the most imperialist of all the nations on this globe do to the fact that it intervenes in more nations than any other country on the globe. Unless you would be so bold as to try and say that nations such as Kosovo or Iraq are stronger than the glorious red, white, and blue. However I did not say that this was good or bad as THEORETICALLY intervening in a weaker nation that is engaging in crimes such as genocide or breaking international law would be good I am just pointing out that by Websters Dictionary's Definition America is indeed engaging in the practice of imperialism. Of course you could claim that you know better than Websters what the words official definition should be and if you want to claim superiority in that field to Websters be my guest buddy...

[RedComrade]

"Show me one communist country that could be even remotely considered a democracy, wise one. Looks like this guy is also a big Rage Against the Machine fan. One can only ask whether this band's ignorance is contagious."

Websters Dictionary:Communism-Socialism as formulated by Marx; a system of common ownership of property
None of the countries who call themselves communist are communist by anyones standards excluding right wingers such as yourself who wish to degrade communism. Surely you would not consider N korea or Cambodias old government under Pol Pot democratic republic just because they call themselves democratic would you? Of course not in order to understand communism you must read marx and if you had you would understand that their are no states that have ever exsisted to judge communism by so you cant say communism is anti democracy or it is doomed to fail because we have yet to see a communist country emerge. Do you put faith in democracy? If you do than maybe you would not laugh rage off so much pal. Time magazine gave their album Battle of Los Angeles album of the year and time is hardly a right wing publication and is also one of the most read and respected magazines in the nation. Of course you could argue that just because its the most read magazine it doesnt make it better but that argument is quite hostile towards the spirit of democracy

[RedComrade]

"I mean talk about him cow-towing to the United Nations"

You have used Iraqs violation of international law as an excuse to go to war yet you yourself do not beleive the U.S should be accountable to the U.N or even try and present a reasonable excuse for its actions to the international community. The double-standard here just amazes me, its truly hilarious to read these insights into the hypocrisy and ignorance that occupy your thoughts! IT IS GREAT SN KEEP IT COMING !! I could use more humor like this it is classic man!

[synthesis]

Unless you would be so bold as to try and say that nations such as Kosovo or Iraq are stronger than the glorious red, white, and blue.

I would certainly not say that Grenada, East Timor, Cyprus, or Honduras are stronger than the U$A :biggrin:

I found a great quote from Howard Zinn about U.S. intervention in latin America.


Between 1900 and 1933, the United States intervened in Cuba four times, in Nicaragua twice, in Panama six times, in Guatemala once, in Honduras seven times. By 1924 the finances of half of the twenty Latin American states were being directed to some extent by the United States. By 1935, over half of U.S. steel and cotton exports were being sold in Latin America.

Psychologists say that violent tendencies start early...

[RedComrade]

"I mean really, we have some serious business to attend to if we wish to remain a superpower"

Your real goals are for once openly admitted. You dont give a damn about the quality of life for those in and out of the country. You dont care about building a better and more peaceful world for future generations. You care only about maintaining American dominance in a world of struggle and being fairly intelligent I'm sure you realize that this means manufacturing threats to keep the population alive and secretly opposing democratic powers in Japan and Europe who could easily rise to rival status if allowed to have militaries even close to the size of the U.S. You know the necessity for maintaning the constant stream of "grave dangers" weve been fed since world war 11 to justify the largest military budget of any country in the world, you know the necessity of intervention, and surely you know that democracy can be supported in rhetoric only (and is as was pointed out by another comrades long list of american intervention against democratically elected leaders in favor of puppet dictators) because seeing as the majority of people are not us citizens and do not want superpowers but rather an equal playing field for all peoples of all nations they would express it in the polls and this would not allow the U.S to remain a superpower. If you truly are concerned by the buisiness of keeping this nation a superpower you are destined to come into conflict with democracy as the powers that be have found when running the country. I suggest you read Dettering Democracy by Noam Chomsky and then try and debate Americas role in this world and what exactly were concerned about

[RedComrade]

"I don't think I need to point out how fucking stupid you are anymore. I will simply let you open your mouth and your words will speak for themselves. I could not accomplish the task of pointing out your ignorance as well as you do everyday. "

Funny i was thinking the same thing about you SN...




(Edited by RedComrade at 8:32 am on Jan. 4, 2003)

[RedComrade]

""Innocent people should die because what the government is doing. Then I am fucking happy all those people in the WTC are fucking dead. Hell, I'm going walk down to Ground Zero and piss on it."-ComradeJunichi "

You listed this qoute yet you yourself beleive in war even if innocents will die in Iraq for their twisted leader sadaams actions. Hell youve already discredited the UN so its obvious you have no desire for international pressure but would prefer a US go it alone thing were the petroleum benifits well gain well be exclusive an international action would undermine the US as a superpower and you yourself espouse maintaining global supremacy as a very important goal.


(Edited by RedComrade at 8:46 am on Jan. 4, 2003)

[RedComrade]

"And I thought it was good old fashion rabid anti-Americanism. Silly me. Seriously, you are comparing the U.S. to a rouge nation. We are probably the only county that has lived up to the 1972 Biological Weapons and Toxin Convention where over 140 nations signed a treaty that forbids the development, possession and use of biological and chemical weapons. Your comparison is flawed. You don't know your history, and apparently do not keep up on current events. "

Im sure if you were to have weapons across the US the results would be very surprising when it comes to our compliance with that treaty SN. We have also backed out of the anti ballistic missile treaty. We are one of the few nations opposing an international court, the kyoto agreement, and we are the only nation to voice such widespread scepticism on global warming. Are views on Iraqs "grave threat" are held only by israel in the immediate area that would be threatened by this threat israel is hardly a majority and if u beleive in democracy you would side with the majority(democracy is defined as taking an issue and having the parties involved vote not watever sick twisted defintion u can come up with to justify policies designed to benifit a few and are opposed to many) And you yourself have expressed disgust at the us complying with the UN. Seriously man this hypocrisy is getting to be a bit much...


(Edited by RedComrade at 8:47 am on Jan. 4, 2003)

[RedComrade]

"Another great from CCCP. Tell me fool, what aspect of Christianity lines up with socialist thinking? I can tell you are no theologian. The philosophy of Jesus and socialists are diametrically opposed"

gOD says the poor will inherit the earth if thats not socialism than what is ? Some of the gems in the bible are speaking out against the wealthy and encouraging compassion and support of the poor and while not outright socialist very liberal leaning. Jesus was a liberal radical for his time.

[RedComrade]

"I really had to tone it down so I could continue to get laid"

Once again your merits,motives,words, and actions speak for themselves. Christ you sound like some of the fuckheads on my football team...

[RedComrade]

"as much or more as I hate communists"

By admitting your ability to equate a group of ppl trying to build a better tommorow for EVERYONE in their own individual way to hating ppl based on their race you continue to expose your ignorance. It is also an accurate reflection of your character to hate those who disagree with you seeing as you have admitted you hate communists. To hell with getting to know us, all communists are pathetic and are the lowest form of human life and should be hated


(Edited by RedComrade at 8:49 am on Jan. 4, 2003)

[RedComrade]

"there's 2 forms of descrimination, direct and indirect, i don't see how anyone could accuse you of direct descrimination, but someone might be able to accuse you of indirect descrimination somehow,"

Wouldnt you consider hating communists as a discrimination? He has nothing but malice towards a whole group based on their ideologies regardless of their personalities or actions but thats just in his own words

[RedComrade]

"You can determine the extent of your own success in a capitalist society."

A child born into poverty doesnt choose shit. He doesnt choose to get sick and then due to lack of medical insurance die or lose what little surplus wealth his family has paying for a doctor. A child doesnt choose to go to the worst school systems in his area. He doesnt choose to grow up in an environment of violence, ignorance, drugs, abuse, and poverty. He doesnt choose any of that!

[RedComrade]

"Your have a genuine gift of spewing pure garbage, everytime you speak. It's almost amusing to me, but then I remember that you take yourself seriously"

I know you hate commies and all and therefore hate me man but it is simply fuking amazing how much we agree on man not that im saying dyermakers an idiot (quite the oppostie comrade) but i do like the way you put it man i think it applies to you quite nicely

[RedComrade]

Earlier you talked about the crimes of the ussr (under stalin! ud be hard pressed to come up with such murderous actions under other leaders (unless you call shit like the Black Book objective) except with possibly lenin) and the nazis which i agree were unnacceptable but what about us man the good ole u.s of a do you know how many millions of indians died so that you could have the land this country has used to build and prosper? And this genocide was done under the same form of democracy we have today not that im arguing against democracy just pointing out that it hardly solves evil (slavery and the indians for example) and am curious as to your feelings on the countries actions regarding these things under the same type of democracy we have today?

[RedComrade]

"It is you who has consistently invented history for your own gain, you who knows nothing of the word of Marx, you who pretends like he knows what the fuck he's talking about when he doesn't. You are a liar."

Dyermaker you took the words right out of my mouth at least some ppl still speak the truth! Solidarity Comrade!! Spoken like it should be!

[RedComrade]

Well thats most of the ignorant shit youve said on this thread stormin norman only all the other forums youve contributed to to go! O well perservearance and a good appreciation for these humorous hates will get me through!

[RedComrade]

"We are probably the only county that has lived up to the 1972 Biological Weapons and Toxin Convention where over 140 nations signed a treaty that forbids the development, possession and use of biological and chemical weapons"
If we abided so closely by this treaty why is it that the government admits we gave sadaam antrax back during his conflict with Iran? I mean this isnt a damn conspiracy theory pal it was reported in the new york times, usa today, the boston globe and almost all the other major publication that back in the good ole ronnie years we supplied sadaam with anthrax how is it that we abide by the treaty when we admit to giving other nations anthrax did we just pull the anthrax out of are asses? Obviously not we had stockpiles of the shit, we were preety damned reckless with who we supplied with it, and we continue to store and develope these weapons. With billions of dollars being spent on "black ops projects(= secret developement of new weapons whose details are not open to the public) its a fact by odds that at least some of that money is going towards developing and maintaining chemical and biological weapons

[j]

Welcome to the board red comrade!!! Your thoughts are incredibly enlightening and well directed.

However, we have "caged" the cappies and right wingers to the Soc. V. Cap forum--so all his ignorant comments will be in THIS forum.

j

[antieverything]

Ever notice that when Norm is getting pummeled, his cappie friends never help? Think it has something to do with the fact that he is an embarassment to them? Just look at him getting destroyed by Dyer Maker! It's hillarious...I feel sorry for the guy!

[RedComrade]

"In my pursuit I never make an attempt to redefine history or reality. "

"Of course, you all know my political leanings by now, and they do represent the looking glass by which I view the world"

Well heres another qoute to pile on to the already tremendous stack of capitalist idiocy. I think the contraidiction between the two speaks for itself.

[RedComrade]

Comrades I'd like to take a minute to encourage all of you to use this forum for what it was meant to be used for, to point out idiotic qoutes from idiotic tongues. While Norm being the idiot he is has completely misrepresented idiots by citing almost all left wingers for idiotic qoutes we can still change this thread to stand for some shread of truth. So skim this forum and in almost every post by norm and his right-wing cronies their is sure to be a qoute fit to exposed for the sheer idiocy it is! Dont let these right wingers continue to misrepresent reality expose the capitalists for what they are!
HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!!!

[RedComrade]

Thank You J, its quite easy though just give it a try these types qoutes are in no short supply! Solidarity Comrades!

[RedComrade]

"we should run a bombing mission over N. Korea for the purpose of destroying the materials and machinery necessary for creating nuclear weapons"

This another ignorant statement that even the warmongers in the white house wouldnt be so foolish as to speak. The fact that bombing reacor cores and storage areas full of radioactive material sounds good to you? Perhaps it is you who is suicidal as any smart capitalist would understand the potential consequences from such a foolish action. The radiation that would be released (depending on which way the wind was blowing) would carry over to the soil of one of three of our allies russia,china, s korea, or even possibly japan. The havoc such a catastophe would wreak on the innocent populations would have the affect of creating 2 enemies in the region and completely undermining our credibility as "the global policeman". Also the radiation would destroy the economies of those powers in the region ruining the crops and creating a major humanitarian crisis. Does Chernobyl ring a bell?

[RedComrade]

"It always suprised me how such an organization could be allowed to exist."

This blatant hatred and contempt for free speech and free thought is typical of the right wingers who frequent this forum however it was posted by mr dark capitalist not norm. It offers great insight into their twisted authoritarian minds whose ultimate goal is the destruction of free speech and the freedom to campaign for ideas only after they are approved by the authoritarian government they wish to create. Be wary comrades these fools openly admit to wishing for the destruction of free speech

[RedComrade]

"You are the ones who have no concept of what it takes to defend those ideals which have made North America a bastion of freedom of movement and ideas. You are the guttermouths that abuse your fundamental freedom of speech for the purpose of extinguishing that right. If I had my way, your attempts to undermine the security of the American and Canadian people would be classified as hostile to the state. You would be sent to camp X-ray where you can live among your natural allies."
Here Norm goes again equating those he disagrees with to terrorists and suggesting they be sent to internment camps. It is yet another example of these right wingers delusional ideals on free speech which they see as something that should be selective with every beleif that they disagree with or is unpopular as resulting in death or prison. These authoritarian bastards are stalinist on everything except for economic issues.

[RedComrade]

What cat got your tongue i have analyzed 23 of your statements and not 1 capitalist has responded yet it looks like the socialists triumph yet again in a debate. I thought this group might offer a little competition looks like i'll have to go somewer else in my hunt for intelligent right wingers, too bad.....

[synthesis]

What cat got your tongue i have analyzed 23 of your statements and not 1 capitalist has responded yet

Which is strange. Whenever they're getting their ass kicked they usually respond with a post frothing with baseless insults, most often some variant of "commie filth", and no real debating points whatsoever.

[Stormin Norman]

I think it's funny that RedCommie would have this to say about the revelation that I, like most men, have to be careful about my language in order to get laid:

"Once again your merits,motives,words, and actions speak for themselves. Christ you sound like some of the fuckheads on my football team..."

I guess I wasn't being sensitive enough to the people on this bulletin board that have little hope of ever touching a woman. My condolences. A little known fact to losers such as yourself remains that normal people engage in sexual activity with partners. I know this seems strange to somebody so dependent on self gratification, but the majority of people have sex. If my motives to get some action speak for themselves, too bad. I will not apologize for my testosterone to some whining underdeveloped tworp such as yourself. You assume this is only a practice that a jock would engage in. I submit; you must not have much contact with members of the human race. The desire to have sex motivates both men and women alike. In my experience women talk about sex more explicitly then men. Of course, they usually do this amongst themselves. None the less, your critique of my statement exposes you for the pathetic, antisocial, sexually frustrated loser that you are, and I will not apologize to the likes of you. Here is a word of advice. If you reach 25 years old and still haven't got laid, hire a hooker. I say this because it is the only chance you will ever have of experiencing this normal activity.

[Stormin Norman]

"Nothing is ever universally correct, and nothing is ever universally incorrect. You will find a supporter for every inept dictator that has existed, from Stalin to Somoza, and you will find a critic of every successful leader as well."-dyermaker

Here dyermaker makes the case that universal truths do not exist, because people supported Hilter and Stalin, while others criticized Churchill and Roosevelt. This is a pathetic way of suggesting that a person's perceptions dictate truth.

Interestingly, vile groups like NAMBLA and Creativity depend on the shared perceptions of others to legitimize their perverse thinking. If what dyermaker says is true, then he would have no basis for his disgust in the Church of the Creator. He would have no basis to attack the positions held by the capitalists he claims eat babies.

Obviously, dyermaker believes in some view of right and wrong. Does that mean his perception is always right? No. Is it safe to assume that there exists a fundamental truth about what constitutes right and wrong? I think psychologists have a word for people who truly believe as dyermaker suggests. Call them insane. Call them sociopaths. Call them what you will, but the consensus remains that this view allows for disasterous results. I contend that it aids in the fundamental source of the countless murders that have been committed throughout the history of the world. This is a view necessary for genocide, something that people like dyermaker would have to remain indifferent to if they truly followed this nonphilosophy.

[RedComrade]

Well Norm you've one down 22 to go congratulations buddy! No I'm sorry to dissapoint you pal I am 14 and anything but anti-social you stupid shit! I will try and post my pic on the chit chat asap I am anything but an underdeveloped twarp I am a starting DT and LT on the football team and am class president you retard. You dont start on a goddamn football team and get elected by a majority of mindless adolescents largely concerned souly on the appearance and social status of the canidates by being an undeveloped tworp with no chance of laying hands on a women. Its pathetic how foolish you are to suggest that because I have enough self-respect to not lie to a girl in order to get mine that means i dont get any from attractive social people who are mentionable to your ilk. If anything it shows a greater number of options on my part because I can still find women I can tell the truth too and have a productive sexual relationship with. I however do not have so few options as to have to be a coward and lie about what i really think to still find an attractive intelligent social girl who will have me(this is a preference i am not so hateful and vain as to deny the exsistence of those less naturally endowed as me and my crew i treat them with respect and even talk to them although this must be absurd to vain cappies such as yourself) The fact that you responded to a post that allowed you to capitalize on typical stereotypes of left-wingers with moral principles exposes your stupidity and inability to respond to any of the other times i qouted you because quite simply you cant. All you can do is cash in on lame old stereotypes that are anything but the truth friend. I hate to deteriorate into lame jock newspeak but Im sure i get a lot more pelt than you did when you were 14 old chap. On a more important and serious note why dont you try responding to any of my other posts that expose your ideological fallacies not your pathetic lack of brainpower...

[Stormin Norman]

I am not fooled.

[RedComrade]

But friend if you want to degenerate this post into a mindless trading of insults on appearance and sex appeal i spose we could both post our pics and have the ppposite sex weigh in. The fact that youve tried to paint me as an unattractive geek is really low and in this case untrue so if you like i spose we could settle it fair and square man. Its funny tho cuz u did exactly what dyermaker said you would you responded with lame insults and derogatory terms, not actually engaging the opponent in intelligent debate but trying to poke fun at him with crude slander and newspeak. Face up cappie fool your caught in between a rock and a hard place your crude, untrue slanderous comments will be exposed for what they are

[RedComrade]

Your a dumb shit man you want me to post my damned football picture to you idiot how many sports did u play in highschool? Did you play football have you ever watched the game on tv how many undeveloped tworps do you see out there tackling 225 lb running backs?

[Stormin Norman]

You listed this qoute yet you yourself beleive in war even if innocents will die in Iraq for their twisted leader sadaams actions. Hell youve already discredited the UN so its obvious you have no desire for international pressure but would prefer a US go it alone thing were the petroleum benifits well gain well be exclusive an international action would undermine the US as a superpower and you yourself espouse maintaining global supremacy as a very important goal.

You are the one making ignorant statements here. If you can not see the difference between accidental damage on a population and direct terrorism, then there is nothing to debate. You have already proven yourself unable to distinguish between two very separate ideas. Your lack of evaluative skills is baffling even for a 14 year old.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 11:19 pm on Jan. 5, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

Your a dumb shit man you want me to post my damned football picture to you idiot how many sports did u play in highschool? Did you play football have you ever watched the game on tv how many undeveloped tworps do you see out there tackling 225 lb running backs?

I think you protest too much. Curious.

[RedComrade]

If this country fights this war like it has its past wars and every other nation fights their wars (take wwII for example the firebombings of tokyo designed to instill fear and terror souly in the civilian population same for the atomic bomb, even operations as recent as the covert contra actions in which the cia trained the contras to specifically target civilians and infrastructure supporting those civilians so as to instill terror and lack of confidence in ther government from the civilian population and this is no damned conspiracy theory it was a major story in the presses of latin america and is mentioned in a new york times best seller) than the civilian population will be targeted knowingly. The economic sanctions currently imposed on Iraq are further evidence of this strategy besides keeping Iraq from trading with other nations it is denying the civilian population important tools necessary for medical care and clean water the figures of Iraqi deaths due to dirty water and malnourishment are astonishingly high some of the highest child death rates in the world. All of this is used to increase dissent with the government who is in power since to the people it obviously is the governments duty to provide these things it also makes it quite easy for the us to say Iraq is mismanaging its economy due to poor leadership

[RedComrade]

"I think you protest too much. Curious."
What the hell is that sposed to mean explain

[Stormin Norman]

I know you hate commies and all and therefore hate me man but it is simply fuking amazing how much we agree on man not that im saying dyermakers an idiot (quite the oppostie comrade) but i do like the way you put it man i think it applies to you quite nicely

and


"I don't think I need to point out how fucking stupid you are anymore. I will simply let you open your mouth and your words will speak for themselves. I could not accomplish the task of pointing out your ignorance as well as you do everyday. "

All I am seeing is you take my words and them try to apply them to me. I realize that this is indicative of your age, but come on. I would expect even you to be above the old "I know you are but what am I". How pathetic.

I know you wish for me to address the other 19 non-issue posts you've made, but I would rather spend my time talking to adults who make valid points. Sorry, but that rules you out.

If you had shown any ability to make valid points I would not be resorting to this type of ageism. Perhaps you could take this discrimination up with NAMBLA. I hear they are advocates for children who have been victims of ageism. Good luck.

[Stormin Norman]

"What the hell is that sposed to mean explain"

It means that I struck a nerve. The way by which you have reacted to this meaningless insult indicates that it was probably true. How funny!

[RedComrade]

Well I was correct on one thing you point out your mistakes. You have refused to adress 19 other posts and chose to adress only those which you knew could be used to turn into a humorous attack based around common stereotypes and such. The facts are Norm is you did leave 19 posts unaswered and while Im sure at least one or two of them maybe flawed the vast majority arent they are good valid posts exposing right wing hypocrisy at it finest (excuse the contraction between finest and rightwing). After reading through your posts its not hard to tell that while full of humor and satirical and sarcastic wit most of them lack content and authentic substance. In response to the majority of my arguments (while the bast minority are left untouched) you have used sterotypes and foul language to dismiss me. After reading through ALL of my 23 posts one has to seriously question whether you tuck tail and run because of that "im to smart for you b.s" or because you have nothing to say to the other 19 posts because it is those posts that have the VALID points on which you are all to lacking

[RedComrade]

Me offering proof that it is false and exposing you in the act is proving you correct the hell it is! My proposal remains the same if im such a weak ugly little tworp and yur the big attractive ladies man than you have nothing to fear from us both posting our pics and having a group of objective members of the opposite sex coming in and weighing in on who it is exactly whose the anti-social tworp Dream on cappie pig

[Stormin Norman]

I think it is funny that you would assume that I read all of your posts. I responded to the ones I did read, and I think we demonstrated who lacks credibility. Need I read further? Give me a break.

Maybe, if I am in a good mood I can revisit some of your misnomers, and get around to pointing out that it is you who remain ignorant. Think what you want about me leaving any of them unanswered. Fact is, there are so many other people on this board who deserve my attention.

You came out and tried to attack me. Now you are unhappy that I disrespected you. What did you expect. If you wished for me to address you posts you should have gone about it in a different manner. That is your fault, not mine.

[RedComrade]

Not unhappy i dont seek happiness on internet forums im merely left feeling unsatisfied by this lack of debate. Seriously if my posts are so stupid,childish,monotonous,shallow, and what not then it shouldnt take any time to read through em, analyze em, and in a short sentence sum up whats wrong with em that sounds fair duznt it if my arguments are so illogial stupid etc. Its kool you want to get to other comrades tho man I dont want to monopolize the debate man but i would like to get my piece of the pie in the debate and not be laughed off becuz of my age wen ur dun enlightening evry1 else retort and well see just how simplistic and hollow my 14 year old liberal mind is man. Seriously tho wen ur dun man come back and well play this debate out...

[RedComrade]

You yourself said their are no universal truths man and to suggest all of those 23 arguments lack credibility is stating a false universal truth. I wont be so arrogant as to say theyre all fool-proof but i do have a gem or to in em and await sum real debate

[RedComrade]

O and I used the same manner you were already using man i took ignorant qoutes and went even farther than you and typed up an analyisis of why they were ignorant. I was doing the same damn thing you did pal so if its wrong then wer both wrong

[Stormin Norman]

I never said the were no universal truths. Now you are putting words in my mouth. If you care for create an atmosphere were I might even consider discussing ideas with you, then I suggest apologizing for the approach that you chose to take. Then tell me which point you wish for me to address first. Only then will I even consider exchanging ideas with you. If what you say about arriving at the truth is true, then I would be happy to put this behind us and engage in further conversation despite your age. Coincidently, I don't care how old you are. I care about your thinking. The ball is in your court.

[RedComrade]

I do appologize for the misunderstanding and have a sincere wish to debate with you on each and every1 of the 23 posts i qouted you on excluding the 1 or 2 that are insults i threw in but do not actually deal with ideology. Perhaps saying you claiming i had a lack of credibility is equal to you stating a universal truth is a bit much but i do feel it is a very broad generalization to say i lack a credible argument. Does that suffice for an apology and in turn real argument and if you expect me to be completely nice and what not i guess i will have no argument because u no as well as i an insult here and there is part of a heated debate between to ppl of differing views so lighten up and let the debate begin man. If u wer mad tho about me putting words in ur mouth tho srry man i wont do it again as long as you dont do it if you truly want to have a rational debate between two intelligent ppl that wont be a problem...I await your replies to my post comrade or norm or however u choose to be adressed by. Note that i am not so set in my views as to avoid identifying myself with member of the opposite ideology man i think you really think uve found a truth and me being objective i respect ppl for finding ther own universal truths i just think ur misguided


(Edited by RedComrade at 12:23 pm on Jan. 5, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

"We are probably the only county that has lived up to the 1972 Biological Weapons and Toxin Convention where over 140 nations signed a treaty that forbids the development, possession and use of biological and chemical weapons"
If we abided so closely by this treaty why is it that the government admits we gave sadaam antrax back during his conflict with Iran? I mean this isnt a damn conspiracy theory pal it was reported in the new york times, usa today, the boston globe and almost all the other major publication that back in the good ole ronnie years we supplied sadaam with anthrax how is it that we abide by the treaty when we admit to giving other nations anthrax did we just pull the anthrax out of are asses? Obviously not we had stockpiles of the shit, we were preety damned reckless with who we supplied with it, and we continue to store and develope these weapons. With billions of dollars being spent on "black ops projects(= secret developement of new weapons whose details are not open to the public) its a fact by odds that at least some of that money is going towards developing and maintaining chemical and biological weapons

So far, this is probably the most ignorant thing I have read from your attacks upon upon my intelligence. You simply state that the U.S. gave Iraq antrax as a means of countering my claim that the U.S. has abided by the 1972 convention treaty. You mention some sources, but fail to provide anything that would indicate what I have said to be wrong. This statement is a blatant lie mustered by anit-Americans who wish to demonize the U.S..

Let's look at the truth. I myself have seen Commerce Department documents that list a variety of biological sample sent to Iraq over the course of a number of years. In fact, many academic institutions regularly work with agents like anthrax. Antrax is a disease that naturally effects wildlife. Therefore, there is much work being done to study its effects and the overall nature of the bacterium. For years these samples were sent to other academic institutions around the world. This is the way by which Iraq obtained U.S. strains of anthrax. Does this match the surreptious mode that you would suggest? No. Shoud we have been more careful about regulating the use of anthrax for educational purposes? Yes, but to suggest that the U.S. government is responsible, and did this out of ill-will is ridiculous. Nothing supports your claim that the U.S. has ever violated the 1972 agreement, or is even responsible for the shipments to Iraq. They failed to recognize a potential threat and act, but they did nothing to support Iraq's weapons programs. The threat was in academia, they are the ones guilty of shipping biological samples to universities around the world. It appears that you are the one is ignorant about this particular subject, and I offer you a source that supports my position. Try to find a credible source that counters it. Good Luck!

http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry102802.asp

[Stormin Norman]

Apology accepted. I too apologize for the insults I threw your way. No, I don't expect you to be completely nice to me, but we should establish a mutual respect if we wish to arrive at anything productive. Since we are so divided along ideological lines, I am sure things can get nasty at times. However, I think we are well on our way to that foundation of respect that will allow for us to look past such transgressions.

Thanks,

SN

[RedComrade]

Agreed I hope you were just joking about the tworp thing man haha i wouldnt want to have to embarass you man with my "strikingly beautiful appearance" in the words of an ex haha im full of myself ill retort to ur anthrax response tomorrow or rather today along with your other responses its 5 am here and i have yet to sleep be warned cappie fool this argument has yet to end, *dum dummm* to be continued.........

(Edited by RedComrade at 12:47 pm on Jan. 5, 2003)

[synthesis]

Obviously, dyermaker believes in some view of right and wrong. Does that mean his perception is always right? No. Is it safe to assume that there exists a fundamental truth about what constitutes right and wrong? I think psychologists have a word for people who truly believe as dyermaker suggests. Call them insane. Call them sociopaths. Call them what you will, but the consensus remains that this view allows for disasterous results. I contend that it aids in the fundamental source of the countless murders that have been committed throughout the history of the world. This is a view necessary for genocide, something that people like dyermaker would have to remain indifferent to if they truly followed this nonphilosophy.

Notice that you did not actually attempt to explain to me what this so-called condition I have is and what the symptoms are.

I suppose there is a universal truth, and that is what is good for humanity. Now, what's good for humanity is certainly arguable, and it is a debate that has been going on for millenia.

How one goes about this is the matter at hand, I believe. The Creators believe that a world with nothing but white people would be best for humanity... do you see my point? Everybody wants one goal, but how to go about that goal can create some pretty violent shit.

I think we demonstrated who lacks credibility.

I think you have demonstrated who possesses this deficiency in the eight months that you've been here - you.

You have made a consistent habit of not responding to vital points, ignoring revelatory ideas, possessing selective vision - it is you who has displayed a shocking amount of ignorance and willfully remaining in such a state.

Most recently, you have revealed another remarkable facet of your lack of debating tenacity - the ad hominem attack, the mark of a truly weak debator. You immediately attempt to discredit RedComrade's two dozen insightful posts solely on the charge that he is a mere 14 years old, and thus incapable of possessing any real wisdom whatsoever.

I know you wish for me to address the other 19 non-issue posts you've made, but I would rather spend my time talking to adults who make valid points.

You are a fucking moron.

(Edited by DyerMaker at 12:47 pm on Jan. 5, 2003)

[RedComrade]

Back to the argument one last time from what ive seen ive seen i agree with comrade dyermaker but instead of gettin pissed and up and leaving prove us wrong man. I thought it was kind of shitty how you initially dismissed all of my posts and am delighted by the chance to join with my comrades and debunk you with logic and truth it a real debate, haha but for now syonara comrades

[Stormin Norman]

""I'm actually pro democracy as are all leftists."

That's probably the best one yet."

Norman by pointing out this statement as ignorant you are not only exposing your own ignorance but you are also offering a superb insight into the mind of a right-winger. A right winger such as yourself sees such a statement and knowing that your definition of leftist is someone who is anti-democracy laughs and assumes your definition is correct and a universal truth. However by doing so you expose YOUR ignorance and hypocrisy for extending your perspective to everything but at the same time refusing to recognize and respect that as an individual his definition of leftist is someone who is pro democracy and that you must be pro democracy to be a leftist. You cant tell him what his definition of leftist is and as you attempt to by saying that it is different than what he said you open yourself up to the laughter and ridicule that any rational individual would give to someone who claims he's pyschic as you obviously claim to be considering you think you know what a leftist is in that mans eyes

My definition of democracy is rooted in Lockean principles. John Locke and others like Jefferson saw private property as an essential ingredient for the insurance of democracy. Leftist wish to destroy this fundamental tenant of democracy. Aside from the historical record of record of communism's human rights abuses, this is the reason for my amusement of a leftist claiming that "all leftist are pro-democracy". Is it really so hard to understand this point.

Aside from a couple of Scandanavian Socialist regimes, I have yet to see the democratic merit of socialist ideals. If I have no right to keep what I earn, I am not secure in my person, papers or property. Socialism does not protect these civil rights and should not be considered democratic. If a democratically socialist country were to operate in a competitive market without the theft of large industries and cohersion, I would not have a such a problem. France is probably the best example of where this is true. I would still consider them a democracy, even though they give too much power to the executive.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 12:57 am on Jan. 6, 2003)

[RedComrade]

I beleive Sweden or Switzerland has the highest GNP of any nation and they are a very liberal nation when compared to the united states. I would question wether the principles of Marx were rooted in taking away personal possesions or property as something that can be used to amass capital through rent. I mean taking away the land from a noble who has used it to rob a peasant for hundreds of years is hardly something that I would find any tears for. Speaking for myself I feel all of the basic needs: food clothing shelter and healthcare are needs that we as social beings have a duty to provide each other with. If that means taking an extra 2 mill out multi billionares backpockets so what. History shows us that not only that is this reasoable fair and just but also applicable without severely damaging the economy as economic sucesses such as sweden and switzerland, , france, norway etc show us i realize this is far from being marxist doctrine and is very moderate socialism but im just to damned tired to continue the argument at this moment to be continued... peace comrades...


(Edited by RedComrade at 1:08 pm on Jan. 5, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

Have you responded to every point ever made on this bulletin board, dyermaker?

I didn't think so. If you are referring to your claim that there has been democratic communism, as I told you before, I am investigating that claim.

As far as attacking RedCommie, he had it coming to him. He is the one who bit first. I had to show him that I was just as capable of such a low form of debate. Since then I have proceeded to debate him on the merits, just like I debate you on the merits, Vox. Funny how you attack my use of the Ad Hominem attack then proceed to call me a moron. The ad hominem attack was rarely utilized by me until your kind put the words Stormin Moron under my avatar. Now tell me again, who holds the weaker argument.

By the way, I never suggested that you were among the mentally ill people who can not distinguish between right and wrong. Quite the opposite, I called you a sophist who uses that line, but believes quite the oppisite. I said, your desire to debate the points contradicts your claim.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 1:09 am on Jan. 6, 2003)

[RedComrade]

Shit man I have no problem with agressively retorting i was referring to the possibility of you abandoning the debate as something I didnt want or think should happen considering Im a compassionate human being and feeling bad for your misguided positions want the chance to bring you over to the light of glorious *socialism!*(hasta la victoria siempre!)

[Stormin Norman]

From:antieverything
Ever notice that when Norm is getting pummeled, his cappie friends never help? Think it has something to do with the fact that he is an embarassment to them? Just look at him getting destroyed by Dyer Maker! It's hillarious...I feel sorry for the guy!

Perhaps the other cappies here understand that I can take care of myself. Unlike you cowards that feel the need to gang up on people in disproportional numbers, those like CI, DC, and myself brave being outnumbered and continue to debate on a forum run by people with the opposite ideology.

I don't see embarassment as being the reason at all, but I can recognize jeolousy when I see it. Antieverything's jealousy is easily perceived when I laid out a 2.5 page document designing a government for the state. This is all he had to say:

"Thanks for the input, Norm...but it is pretty easy when you only have to write a page."

Later, I commended a debate he had with Crusader 4 da Truth, and he felt it necessary to bring up a spelling error fro m months ago. One thing is certain, people don't usually try to knock each other down a peg unless they feel threatened. It is obvious this is the reason for the treatment I have continued to be subjected to since my first days posting on Che-Lives. The fact that you try to discredit me by placing insults under my avatar is evidence of this fact.

Sorry, but people like me exist in the world. I know this is the reason you wish to reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator. Some of you feel that it would give you a leg up in the world, put you on equal footing, perhaps give you a chance to compete. I say that you are cowards who would have no chance of competing in the real world, and this is why you aim to destroy a competitive system. It's truly sad.

[Stormin Norman]

Show me one communist country that could be even remotely considered a democracy, wise one. Looks like this guy is also a big Rage Against the Machine fan. One can only ask whether this band's ignorance is contagious."

Websters Dictionary:Communism-Socialism as formulated by Marx; a system of common ownership of property
None of the countries who call themselves communist are communist by anyones standards excluding right wingers such as yourself who wish to degrade communism. Surely you would not consider N korea or Cambodias old government under Pol Pot democratic republic just because they call themselves democratic would you? Of course not in order to understand communism you must read marx and if you had you would understand that their are no states that have ever exsisted to judge communism by so you cant say communism is anti democracy or it is doomed to fail because we have yet to see a communist country emerge. Do you put faith in democracy? If you do than maybe you would not laugh rage off so much pal. Time magazine gave their album Battle of Los Angeles album of the year and time is hardly a right wing publication and is also one of the most read and respected magazines in the nation. Of course you could argue that just because its the most read magazine it doesnt make it better but that argument is quite hostile towards the spirit of democracy

Two of the organizations that I understand Zach De La Rocha to support are the National Liberation Army (ELN) and the Revolutionary Forces of Columbia (FARC). I believe that I recall he had given them direct monetary support. I am still looking for a source, but I believe I heard this on FOX News. I am not sure. Here is a source that describes the type of terrorism that I believe Zach is guilty of supporting.

http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/farc.html

I have described the difference between guerilla warfare and terrorism on a number of threads. Although the two are different, it does not mean that terrorists can't engage in guerilla warfare, and visa versa. The guerilla groups listed above are guilty of terrorism as is the government of Columbia.

In any event, Zach definetely supports cop killers. What a sack of shit.

[Stormin Norman]

""American Impearlism"

It's not the spelling that I am making fun of, it's the actual claim. "

Websters New World Dictionary defines Imperialism as :The policy of seeking to dominate the affairs of weaker countries. By this definition America is by far the most imperialist of all the nations on this globe do to the fact that it intervenes in more nations than any other country on the globe. Unless you would be so bold as to try and say that nations such as Kosovo or Iraq are stronger than the glorious red, white, and blue. However I did not say that this was good or bad as THEORETICALLY intervening in a weaker nation that is engaging in crimes such as genocide or breaking international law would be good I am just pointing out that by Websters Dictionary's Definition America is indeed engaging in the practice of imperialism. Of course you could claim that you know better than Websters what the words official definition should be and if you want to claim superiority in that field to Websters be my guest buddy...

Then I will believe you instead of the world's foremost political scientists who would not classify the U.S. as an Imperialist. I argued this point with antieverything in this thread:

[url]http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=22&topic=1227[url]

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 4:11 am on Jan. 6, 2003)

[j]

Norm, I gonna jump back into this.

You said that Zach De La Rocha supported terrorism by sending money to ZLN and FARC.

What if you contributed to the campaign of a president who authorized terrorism? Would you then define yourself as a supporter of terrorism?

I'm not claiming that Zach is right or great--I actually feel he's a little hypocritical though I do enjoy the music of Rage and their message.

Also. You can not say that socialism could not be democratic. It might not be your TYPE of democracy but it IS democracy.

j

[antieverything]

The nation's top political scientists? Who are these people and what are their credentials. I personally know a few Political Science professors who believe that the US is an empire...one is a conservative and one is a radical communist.

I brought up the spelling error because it was a particularly funny one...I make spelling errors too but that one was just too humorous to forget. (did you really think that there was no such word as imperialism?)

[Stormin Norman]

Johan Goldberg did an excellent job describing why America is not an empire in laymans terms. Here is an exerpt from one of his articles that appeared on The National Review.

From Not Getting America Misunderstandng the U.S.

NOT AN EMPIRE
This illustrates why, for example, the talk we hear from the paleo-Right and the anti-American Left and most places in-between about the American "empire" is so disingenuous. In fact, if you look really, really closely, you'll discover that when American lefty intellectuals prattle about American imperialism it is mostly a metaphorical argument. They confuse our cultural dominance with the Roman Empire's dominance, skipping right over the fact that the Roman Empire installed Roman governors, collected imperial taxes, imposed Roman law, conscripted colonial subjects into the Roman army (eventually), and generally considered Rome the supreme and final authority on any important question.

Sure, the U.S. has military bases all over the world — which are often compared to Roman garrisons — but unlike Roman garrisons their host countries can get rid of them by asking them to leave. The same holds true for our overly hyped "imperial" holdings, like Puerto Rico. They are one referendum away from independence.

Anyway, my point is simply this: Saying we rule the world doesn't make it so. We don't rule the world. We lead the world — this is a huge distinction to people who live outside the intellectual menagerie of an Ivy League English department. If the coolest guy in school wears a leather jacket and all the other kids follow suit, that's hardly the same thing as the coolest guy forcing them at gunpoint to buy a leather jacket from him.

Now, the fact that we are not an empire, but could be one if we wanted to, confuses the dickens of all sorts of people. Indeed, some people find the idea so confusing they willfully refuse to believe it and just go on insisting we are an empire the way the guy in the Monty Python skit just kept insisting the parrot wasn't dead. Other folks don't use the word "empire" but they are just as confused about America's behavior. Marxists, for example, have a hard time fathoming that America doesn't behave according to their straight-line predictions about how a capitalistic "hegemon" should behave. So they mine the data. They ignore the inconvenient and misinterpret the unignorable.

Europeans who did have colonies and who did invade both their neighbors and distant lands for material gain — and, to be fair, for more ideologically complex motives — have a hard time computing that America isn't behaving the way they did. They think they've evolved past us, that they are on the same road as us and are simply a few miles ahead of us on the path to enlightenment.

What they can't grasp is that America took a different fork in the road a couple of centuries ago. We can argue about who's on the high road or the low road now, but we're on different roads. And judging from the fact that they keep running into ditches, forcing us to be their AAA service, I think they can't tell us much we need to know (this terminates the extended road metaphor). Calling us an empire, Hitler-like, and the rest are simply examples of Europeans misapplying categories from their past onto the United States. America isn't the European past, fellas, America will be the European future, if you're lucky.

Similarly, Arab nationalists and Muslim fanatics believe that the United States wants to colonize the Middle East. They have some understandable reasons to think that, considering how they view Israel, the Shah of Iran, etc., and the degree to which their intellectual class has been poisoned by European intellectual fads. But just because you have evidence which points to a certain conclusion doesn't mean that conclusion is correct. Richard Nixon reportedly once said that the world is obviously overcrowded because wherever he went he saw huge crowds. My wife feeds Cosmo the Wonderdog (too much) when we eat dinner. But that doesn't mean Cosmo is right when he concludes we made the dinner for him.

Look: If America actually wanted to conquer and occupy Iraq, we would have done in it 1991. If we were the imperial nation that all of these buffoons think we are we would have done it back then. In fact, if we were the hegemonic bully all of these people imagine we are, we would have conquered the entire Middle East already. Trust me: It's not the awe-inspiring might of the Arab world's military juggernaut that has kept us from invading and conquering you guys. The only that stopped us is that we didn't want to do it. In fact, I often wonder if the Arab world would rewrite its entire worldview if only it got enough self-esteem to realize that we don't normally spend much time one way or another thinking about Arabs, the crusades, and the rest. We have better things to do.

Nevertheless, I confess I have sympathy for people who want to squeeze America into one prefabricated ideological category or another. America is hard to understand. It doesn't surprise me that we look stupid in a complicated way to people like Nasser and his successors — because those people are blind to what really motivates us. If you don't believe in freedom and democracy and free markets; if you think the only use for power is its utility for furthering your own ambitions then American foreign policy is going to look bizarre. And, if like so many Europeans, you believe that power and force are no longer necessary, that everything in the international arena can be settled by democratic debate or, better, intelligent conversation in the lobby of a four-star hotel, then American foreign policy will look pretty darned weird to you, too.

America is unique because it has the power to be an empire and has chosen not to be one. That choice wasn't merely a hard-headed calculation of our self-interest. And it wasn't an accident either. It was a moral choice, reinforced from one generation to the next. But because so many other nations failed that test, they assume nobody could pass it. Well, we did pass it and if we conquer Iraq we won't turn it into a colony. Hopefully, we'll teach it how to pass the same test.


Full text:http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/gol...dberg092402.asp (http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg092402.asp)

[Stormin Norman]

Here is a relevant discussion about the concept of empires. Dominic Lieven offers a different view.

http://www.fathom.com/feature/122086

Here is a list of some of the various definitions of emperialism. Lieven rightly suggests that there is some disagreement over what constitutes an Empire.

imperialism
the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.
advocacy of imperial interests.
an imperial system of government.
imperial government.
Source: The Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary Copyright © 1997 by Random House Inc.

[/b]imperialism[/b]
Imperialism can also refer more generally to a country's efforts to have a lot of power and influence over other countries, esp. in political and economic matters.
Source: Cambridge International Dictionary of English


imperialism
imperial government, authority, or system
the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence (union imperialism)
Source: Merriam-Webster's
---------------------------------------
If one were trying to explain the Spanish American war, the acquisition of the Panama Canal, or U.S. dominance over the Philippines these definitions would apply to the United States around the 1900's. However, America's history of imperialism remains quite mild in comparison to the former Soviet Union, Great Britian, and Germany. In fact, these policies have long been abandoned. Trying to equate U.S. influence on the world in 2002 to that type of imperialism is a ridiculous charge.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 2:04 am on Jan. 8, 2003)

[antieverything]

imperialism
imperial government, authority, or system
the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence (union imperialism)
Source: Merriam-Webster's

Does American foreign policy in the last 50 years fit that description? I think it does.

[synthesis]

No such thing as American Imperialism, eh?

How about we take a look at the recorded uses of American armed forces worldwide from 1783 to 1993, as compiled by Ellen Collier?

1798-1800 -- Undeclared Naval War with France. This contest included land actions, such as that in the Dominican Republic, city of Puerto Plata, where marines captured a French privateer under the guns of the forts.



1801-05 -- Tripoli. The First Barbary War included the USS George Washington and USS Philadelphia affairs and the Eaton expedition, during which a few marines landed with United States Agent William Eaton to raise a force against Tripoli in an effort to free the crew of the Philadelphia. Tripoli declared war but not the United States.



1806 -- Mexico (Spanish territory). Capt. Z. M. Pike, with a platoon of troops, invaded Spanish territory at the headwaters of the Rio Grande on orders from Gen. James Wilkinson. He was made prisoner without resistance at a fort he constructed in present day Colorado, taken to Mexico, and later released after seizure of his papers.



1806-10 -- Gulf of Mexico. American gunboats operated from New Orleans against Spanish and French privateers off the Mississippi Delta, chiefly under Capt. John Shaw and Master Commandant David Porter.



1810 -- West Florida (Spanish territory). Gov. Claiborne of Louisiana, on orders of the President, occupied with troops territory in dispute east of Mississippi as far as the Pearl River, later the eastern boundary of Louisiana. He was authorized to seize as far east as the Perdido River.



1812 -- Amelia Island and other - parts of east Florida, then under Spain. Temporary possession was authorized by President Madison and by Congress, to prevent occupation by any other power; but possession was obtained by Gen. George Matthews in so irregular a manner that his measures were disavowed by the President.



1812-15 -- War of 1812. On June 18, 1812, the United States declared war between the United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Among the issues leading to the war were British interception of neutral ships and blockades of the United States during British hostilities with France.



1813 -- West Florida (Spanish territory). On authority given by Congress, General Wilkinson seized Mobile Bay in April with 600 soldiers. A small Spanish garrison gave way. Thus U.S. advanced into disputed territory to the Perdido River, as projected in 1810. No fighting.



1813-14 -- Marguesas Islands. U.S. forces built a fort on the island of Nukahiva to protect three prize ships which had been captured from the British.



1814 -- Spanish Florida. Gen. Andrew Jackson took Pensacola and drove out the British with whom the United States was at war.



1814-25 -- Caribbean. Engagements between pirates and American ships or squadrons took place repeatedly especially ashore and offshore about Cuba, Puerto Rico, Santo Domingo, and Yucatan. Three thousand pirate attacks on merchantmen were reported between 1815 and 1823. In 1822 Commodore James Biddle employed a squadron of two frigates, four sloops of war, two brigs, four schooners, and two gunboats in the West Indies.



1815 -- Algiers. The second Barbary War was declared by the opponents but not by the United States. Congress authorized an expedition. A large fleet under Decatur attacked Algiers and obtained indemnities.



1815 -- Tripoli. After securing an agreement from Algiers, Decatur demonstrated with his squadron at Tunis and Tripoli, where he secured indemnities for offenses during the War of 1812.



1816 -- Spanish Florida. United States forces destroyed Nicholls Fort, called also Negro Fort, which harbored raiders making forays into United States territory.



1816-18 -- Spanish Florida - First Seminole War. The Seminole Indians, whose area was a resort for escaped slaves and border ruffians, were attacked by troops under Generals Jackson and Gaines and pursued into northern Florida. Spanish posts were attacked and occupied, British citizens executed. In 1819 the Floridas were ceded to the United States.



1817 -- Amelia Island (Spanish territory off Florida). Under orders of President Monroe, United States forces landed and expelled a group of smugglers, adventurers, and freebooters.



1818 -- Oregon. The USS. Ontario dispatched from Washington, landed at the Columbia River and in August took possession of Oregon territory. Britain had conceded sovereignty but Russia and Spain asserted claims to the area.



1820-23 -- Africa. Naval units raided the slave traffic pursuant to the 1819 act of Congress.



1822 -- Cuba. United States naval forces suppressing piracy landed on the northwest coast of Cuba and burned a pirate station.



1823 -- Cuba. Brief landings in pursuit of pirates occurred April 8 near Escondido; April 16 near Cayo Blanco; July 11 at Siquapa Bay; July 21 at Cape Cruz; and October 23 at Camrioca.



1824 -- Cuba. In October the USS Porpoise landed bluejackets near Matanzas in pursuit of pirates. This was during the cruise authorized in 1822.



1824 -- Puerto Rico (Spanish territory). Commodore David Porter with a landing party attacked the town of Fajardo which had sheltered pirates and insulted American naval officers. He landed with 200 men in November and forced an apology. Commodore Porter was later court-martialed for overstepping his powers.



1825 -- Cuba. In March cooperating American and British forces landed at Sagua La Grande to capture pirates.



1827 -- Greece. In October and November landing parties hunted pirates on the islands of Argenteire, Miconi, and Androse.



1831-32 -- Falkland Islands. Captain Duncan of the USS Lexington investigated the capture of three American sealing vessels and sought to protect American interests.



1832 -- Sumatra - February 6 to 9. A naval force landed and stormed a fort to punish natives of the town of Quallah Battoo for plundering the American ship Friendship.



1833 -- Argentina - October 31 to November 15. A force was sent ashore at Buenos Aires to protect the interests of the United States and other countries during an insurrection.



1835-36 -- Peru - December 10, 1835, to January 24, 1836, and August 31 to December 7, 1836. Marines protected American interests in Callao and Lima during an attempted revolution.



1836 -- Mexico. General Gaines occupied Nacogdoches (Tex.), disputed territory, from July to December during the Texan war for independence, under orders to cross the "imaginary boundary line" if an Indian outbreak threatened.



1838-39 -- Sumatra - December 24, 1838, to January 4, 1839. A naval force landed to punish natives of the towns of Quallah Battoo and Muckie (Mukki) for depredations on American shipping.



1840 -- Fiji Islands - July. Naval forces landed to punish natives for attacking American exploring and surveying parties.



1841 -- Drummond Island, Kingsmill Group. A naval party landed to avenge the murder of a seaman by the natives.



1841 -- Samoa - February 24. A naval party landed and burned towns after the murder of an American seaman on Upolu Island.



1842 -- Mexico. Commodore TA.C. Jones, in command of a squadron long cruising off California, occupied Monterey, Calif., on October 19, believing war had come. He discovered peace, withdrew, and saluted. A similar incident occurred a week later at San Diego.



1843 -- China. Sailors and marines from the St. Louis were landed after a clash between Americans and Chinese at the trading post in Canton.



1843 -- Africa -- November 29 to December 16. Four United States vessels demonstrated and landed various parties (one of 200 marines and sailors) to discourage piracy and the slave trade along the Ivory coast, and to punish attacks by the natives on American seamen and shipping.



1844 -- Mexico. President Tyler deployed U.S. forces to protect Texas against Mexico, pending Senate approval of a treaty of annexation. (Later rejected.) He defended his action against a Senate resolution of inquiry.



1846-48 -- Mexican War. On May 13,1846, the United States recognized the existence of a state of war with Mexico. After the annexation of Texas in 1845, the United States and Mexico failed to resolve a boundary dispute and President Polk said that it was necessary to deploy forces in Mexico to meet a threatened invasion.



1849 -- Smyrna. In July a naval force gained release of an American seized by Austrian officials.



1851 -- Turkey. After a massacre of foreigners (including Americans) at Jaffa in January, a demonstration by the Mediterranean Squadron was ordered along the Turkish (Levant) coast.



1851 -- Johanns Island (east of Africa) -- August. Forces from the U.S. sloop of war Dale exacted redress for the unlawful imprisonment of the captain of an American whaling brig.



1852-53 -- Argentina -- February 3 to 12, 1852; September 17, 1852 to April 1853. Marines were landed and maintained in Buenos Aires to protect American interests during a revolution.



1853 -- Nicaragua -- March 11 to 13. U.S. forces landed to protect American lives and interests during political disturbances.



1853-54 -- Japan. Commodore Perry and his expedition made a display of force leading to the "opening of Japan" and the Perry Expedition.



1853-54 -- Ryukyu and Bonin Islands. Commodore Perry on three visits before going to Japan and while waiting for a reply from Japan made a naval demonstration, landing marines twice, and secured a coaling concession from the ruler of Naha on Okinawa; he also demonstrated in the Bonin Islands with the purpose of securing facilities for commerce.



1854 -- China -- April 4 to June 15 to 17. American and English ships landed forces to protect American interests in and near Shanghai during Chinese civil strife.



1854 -- Nicaragua -- July 9 to 15. Naval forces bombarded and burned San Juan del Norte (Greytown) to avenge an insult to the American Minister to Nicaragua.



1855 -- China -- May 19 to 21. U.S. forces protected American interests in Shanghai and, from August 3 to 5 fought pirates near Hong Kong.



1855 -- Fiji Islands -- September 12 to November 4. An American naval force landed to seek reparations for depredations on American residents and seamen.



1855 -- Uruguay -- November 25 to 29. United States and European naval forces landed to protect American interests during an attempted revolution in Montevideo.



1856 -- Panama, Republic of New Grenada -- September 19 to 22. U.S. forces landed to protect American interests during an insurrection.



1856 -- China -- October 22 to December 6. U.S. forces landed to protect American interests at Canton during hostilities between the British and the Chinese, and to avenge an assault upon an unarmed boat displaying the United States flag.



1857 -- Nicaragua -- April to May, November to December. In May Commander C.H. Davis of the United States Navy, with some marines, received the surrender of William Walker, who had been attempting to get control of the country, and protected his men from the retaliation of native allies who had been fighting Walker. In November and December of the same year United States vessels Saratoga, Wabash, and Fulton opposed another attempt of William Walker on Nicaragua. Commodore Hiram Paulding's act of landing marines and compelling the removal of Walker to the United States, was tacitly disavowed by Secretary of State Lewis Cass, and Paulding was forced into retirement.



1858 -- Uruguay -- January 2 to 27. Forces from two United States warships landed to protect American property during a revolution in Montevideo.



1858 -- Fiji Islands -- October 6 to 16. A marine expedition chastised natives for the murder of two American citizens at Waya.



1858-59 -- Turkey. The Secretary of State requested a display of naval force along the Levant after a massacre of Americans at Jaffa and mistreatment elsewhere "to remind the authorities (of Turkey) of the power of the United States."



1859 -- Paraguay. Congress authorized a naval squadron to seek redress for an attack on a naval vessel in the Parana River during 1855. Apologies were made after a large display of force.



1859 -- Mexico. Two hundred United States soldiers crossed the Rio Grande in pursuit of the Mexican bandit Cortina.



1859 -- China -- July 31 to August 2. A naval force landed to protect American interests in Shanghai.



1860 -- Angola, Portuguese West Africa -- March 1. American residents at Kissembo called upon American and British ships to protect lives and property during problems with natives.



1860 -- Colombia, Bay of Panama -- September 27 to October 8. Naval forces landed to protect American interests during a revolution.



1863 -- Japan -- July 16. The USS Wyoming retaliated against a firing on the American vessel Pembroke at Shimonoseki.



1864 -- Japan -- July 14 to August 3. Naval forces protected the United States Minister to Japan when he visited Yedo to negotiate concerning some American claims against Japan, and to make his negotiations easier by impressing the Japanese with American power.



1864 -- Japan -- September 4 to 14. Naval forces of the United States, Great Britain, France, and the Netherlands compelled Japan and the Prince of Nagato in particular to permit the Straits of Shimonoseki to be used by foreign shipping in accordance with treaties already signed.



1865 -- Panama -- March 9 and 10. U.S. forces protected the lives and property of American residents during a revolution.



1866 -- Mexico. To protect American residents, General Sedgwick and 100 men in November obtained surrender of Matamoras. After 3 days he was ordered by U.S. Government to withdraw. His act was repudiated by the President.



1866 -- China. From June 20 to July 7, U.S. forces punished an assault on the American consul at Newchwang.



1867 -- Nicaragua. Marines occupied Managua and Leon.



1867 -- Formosa -- June 13. A naval force landed and burned a number of huts to punish the murder of the crew of a wrecked American vessel.



1868 -- Japan (Osaka, Hiolo, Nagasaki, Yokohama, and Negata) -- February 4 to 8, April 4 to May 12, June 12 and 13. U.S. forces were landed to protect American interests during the civil war in Japan over the abolition of the Shogunate and the restoration of the Mikado.



1868 -- Uruguay -- February 7 and 8, 19 to 26. U.S. forces protected foreign residents and the customhouse during an insurrection at Montevideo.



1868 -- Colombia -- April. U.S. forces protected passengers and treasure in transit at Aspinwall during the absence of local police or troops on the occasion of the death of the President of Colombia.



1870 -- Mexico -- June 17 and 18. U.S. forces destroyed the pirate ship Forward, which had been run aground about 40 miles up the Rio Tecapan.



1870 -- Hawaiian Islands -- September 21. U.S. forces placed the American flag at half mast upon the death of Queen Kalama, when the American consul at Honolulu would not assume responsibility for so doing.



1871 -- Korea -- June 10 to 12. A U.S. naval force attacked and captured five forts to punish natives for depredations on Americans, particularly for murdering the crew of the General Sherman and burning the schooner, and for later firing on other American small boats taking soundings up the Salee River.



1873 -- Colombia (Bay of Panama) -- May 7 to 22, September 23 to October 9. U.S. forces protected American interests during hostilities over possession of the government of the State of Panama.



1873 -- Mexico. United States troops crossed the Mexican border repeatedly in pursuit of cattle and other thieves. There were some reciprocal pursuits by Mexican troops into border territory. Mexico protested frequently. Notable cases were at Remolina in May 1873 and at Las Cuevas in 1875. Washington orders often supported these excursions. Agreements between Mexico and the United States, the first in 1882, finally legitimized such raids. They continued intermittently, with minor disputes, until 1896.



1874 -- Hawaiian Islands -- February 12 to 20. Detachments from American vessels were landed to preserve order and protect American lives and interests during the coronation of a new king.



1876 -- Mexico -- May 18. An American force was landed to police the town of Matamoras temporarily while it was without other government.



1882 -- Egypt -- July 14 to 18. American forces landed to protect American interests during warfare between British and Egyptians and looting of the city of Alexandria by Arabs.



1885 -- Panama (Colon) -- January 18 and 19. U.S. forces were used to guard the valuables in transit over the Panama Railroad, and the safes and vaults of the company during revolutionary activity. In March, April, and May in the cities of Colon and Panama, the forces helped reestablish freedom of transit during revolutionary activity.



1888 -- Korea -- June. A naval force was sent ashore to protect American residents in Seoul during unsettled political conditions, when an outbreak of the populace was expected.



1888 -- Haiti -- December 20. A display of force persuaded the Haitian Government to give up an American steamer which had been seized on the charge of breach of blockade.



1888--89 -- Samoa -- November 14, 1888, to March 20, 1889. U.S. forces were landed to protect American citizens and the consulate during a native civil war.



1889 -- Hawaiian Islands -- July 30 and 31. U.S. forces protected American interests at Honolulu during a revolution.



1890 -- Argentina. A naval party landed to protect U.S. consulate and legation in Buenos Aires.



1891 -- Haiti. U.S. forces sought to protect American lives and property on Navassa Island.



1891 -- Bering Strait -- July 2 to October 5. Naval forces sought to stop seal poaching.



1891 -- Chile -- August 28 to 30. U.S. forces protected the American consulate and the women and children who had taken refuge in it during a revolution in Valparaiso.



1893 -- Hawaii -- January 16 to April 1. Marines were landed ostensibly to protect American lives and property, but many believed actually to promote a provisional government under Sanford B. Dole. This action was disavowed by the United States.



1894 -- Brazil -- January. A display of naval force sought to protect American commerce and shipping at Rio de Janeiro during a Brazilian civil war.



1894 -- Nicaragua -- July 6 to August 7. U.S. forces sought to protect American interests at Bluefields following a revolution.



1894-95 -- China. Marines were stationed at Tientsin and penetrated to Peking for protection purposes during the Sino--Japanese War.



1894-95 -- China. A naval vessel was beached and used as a fort at Newchwang for protection of American nationals.



1894-96 -- Korea -- July 24, 1894 to April 3, 1896. A guard of marines was sent to protect the American legation and American lives and interests at Seoul during and following the Sino-- Japanese War.



1895 -- Colombia -- March 8 to 9. U.S. forces protected American interests during an attack on the town of Bocas del Toro by a bandit chieftain.



1896 -- Nicaragua -- May 2 to 4. U.S. forces protected American interests in Corinto during political unrest.



1898 -- Nicaragua -- February 7 and 8. U.S. forces protected American lives and property at San Juan del Sur.



1898 -- The Spanish--American War. On April 25, 1898, the United States declared war with Spain. The war followed a Cuban insurrection against Spanish rule and the sinking of the U.S.S. Maine in the harbor at Havana.



1898--99 -- China -- November 5, 1898 to March 15, 1899. U.S. forces provided a guard for the legation at Peking and the consulate at Tientsin during contest between the Dowager Empress and her son.



1899 -- Nicaragua. American and British naval forces were landed to protect national interests at San Juan del Norte, February 22 to March 5, and at Bluefields a few weeks later in connection with the insurrection of Gen. Juan P. Reyes.



1899 -- Samoa -- February-May 15. American and British naval forces were landed to protect national interests and to take part in a bloody contention over the succession to the throne.



1899--1901 -- Philippine Islands. U.S. forces protected American interests following the war with Spain and conquered the islands by defeating the Filipinos in their war for independence.



1900 -- China -- May 24 to September 28. American troops participated in operations to protect foreign lives during the Boxer rising, particularly at Peking. For many years after this experience a permanent legation guard was maintained in Peking, and was strengthened at times as trouble threatened.



1901 -- Colombia (State of Panama) -- November 20 to December 4. U.S. forces protected American property on the Isthmus and kept transit lines open during serious revolutionary disturbances.



1902 -- Colombia -- April 16 to 23. U.S. forces protected American lives and property at Bocas del Toro during a civil war.



1902 -- Colombia (State of Panama) -- September 17 to November 18. The United States placed armed guards on all trains crossing the Isthmus to keep the railroad line open, and stationed ships on both sides of Panama to prevent the landing of Colombian troops.



1903 -- Honduras -- March 23 to 30 or 31. U.S. forces protected the American consulate and the steamship wharf at Puerto Cortez during a period of revolutionary activity.



1903 -- Dominican Republic -- March 30 to April 21. A detachment of marines was landed to protect American interests in the city of Santo Domingo during a revolutionary outbreak.



1903 -- Syria -- September 7 to 12. U.S. forces protected the American consulate in Beirut when a local Moslem uprising was feared.



1903-04 -- Abyssinia. Twenty-five marines were sent to Abyssinia to protect the U.S. Consul General while he negotiated a treaty.



1903-14 -- Panama. U.S. forces sought to protect American interests and lives during and following the revolution for independence from Colombia over construction of the Isthmian Canal. With brief intermissions, United States Marines were stationed on the Isthmus from November 4, 1903, to January 21 1914 to guard American interests.



1904 -- Dominican Republic -- January 2 to February 11. American and British naval forces established an area in which no fighting would be allowed and protected American interests in Puerto Plata and Sosua and Santo Domingo City during revolutionary fighting.



1904 -- Tangier, Morocco. "We want either Perdicaris alive or Raisula dead." A squadron demonstrated to force release of a kidnapped American. Marine guard was landed to protect the consul general.



1904 -- Panama -- November 17 to 24. U.S. forces protected American lives and property at Ancon at the time of a threatened insurrection.



1904-05 -- Korea -- January 5, 1904, to November 11, 1905. A Marine guard was sent to protect the American legation in Seoul during the Russo-Japanese War.



1906-09 -- Cuba -- September 1906 to January 23, 1909. U.S. forces sought to restore order, protect foreigners, and establish a stable government after serious revolutionary activity.



1907 -- Honduras -- March 18 to June 8. To protect American interests during a war between Honduras and Nicaragua, troops were stationed in Trujillo, Ceiba, Puerto Cortez, San Pedro Laguna and Choloma.



1910 -- Nicaragua -- May 19 to September 4. U.S. forces protected American interests at Bluefields.



1911 -- Honduras -- January 26. American naval detachments were landed to protect American lives and interests during a civil war in Honduras.



1911 -- China. As the nationalist revolution approached, in October an ensign and 10 men tried to enter Wuchang to rescue missionaries but retired on being warned away and a small landing force guarded American private property and consulate at Hankow. A marine guard was established in November over the cable stations at Shanghai; landing forces were sent for protection in Nanking, Chinkiang, Taku and elsewhere.



1912 -- Honduras. A small force landed to prevent seizure by the government of an American-owned railroad at Puerto Cortez. The forces were withdrawn after the United States disapproved the action.



1912 -- Panama. Troops, on request of both political parties, supervised elections outside the Canal Zone.



1912 -- Cuba -- June 5 to August 5. U.S. forces protected American interests on the Province of Oriente, and in Havana.



1912 -- China -- August 24 to 26, on Kentucky Island, and August 26 to 30 at Camp Nicholson. U.S. forces protect Americans and American interests during revolutionary activity.



1912 -- Turkey -- November 18 to December 3. U.S. forces guarded the American legation at Constantinople during a Balkan War.



1912-25 -- Nicaragua -- August to November 1912. U.S. forces protected American interests during an attempted revolution. A small force, serving as a legation guard and seeking to promote peace and stability, remained until August 5, 1925.



1912-41 -- China. The disorders which began with the Kuomintang rebellion in 1912, which were redirected by the invasion of China by Japan and finally ended by war between Japan and the United States in 1941, led to demonstrations and landing parties for the protection of U.S. interests in China continuously and at many points from 1912 on to 1941. The guard at Peking and along the route to the sea was maintained until 1941. In 1927, the United States had 5,670 troops ashore in China and 44 naval vessels in its waters. In 1933 the United States had 3,027 armed men ashore. The protective action was generally based on treaties with China concluded from 1858 to 1901.



1913 -- Mexico -- September 5 to 7. A few marines landed at Ciaris Estero to aid in evacuating American citizens and others from the Yaqui Valley, made dangerous for foreigners by civil strife.



1914 -- Haiti -- January 29 to February 9, February 20 to 21, October 19. Intermittently U.S. naval forces protected American nationals in a time of rioting and revolution.



1914 -- Dominican Republic -- June and July. During a revolutionary movement, United States naval forces by gunfire stopped the bombardment of Puerto Plata, and by threat of force maintained Santo Domingo City as a neutral zone.



1914-17 -- Mexico. Undeclared Mexican--American hostilities followed the Dolphin affair and Villa's raids and included capture of Vera Cruz and later Pershing's expedition into northern Mexico.



1915-34 -- Haiti -- July 28, 1915, to August 15, 1934. U.S. forces maintained order during a period of chronic and threatened insurrection.



1916 -- China. American forces landed to quell a riot taking place on American property in Nanking.



1916-24 -- Dominican Republic -- May 1916 to September 1924. American naval forces maintained order during a period of chronic and threatened insurrection.



1917 -- China. American troops were landed at Chungking to protect American lives during a political crisis.



1917-18 -- World War I. On April 6, 1917, the United States declared war with Germany and on December 7,1917, with Austria-Hungary. Entrance of the United States into the war was precipitated by Germany's submarine warfare against neutral shipping.



1917-22 -- Cuba. U.S. forces protected American interests during insurrection and subsequent unsettled conditions. Most of the Uni States armed forces left Cuba by August 1919, but two companies remained at Camaguey until February 1922.



1918-19 -- Mexico. After withdrawal of the Pershing expedition, U.S. troops entered Mexico in pursuit of bandits at least three times in 1918 and s times in 1919. In August 1918 American and Mexican troops fought at Nogales.



1918-20 -- Panama. U.S. forces were used for police duty according to treaty stipulations, at Chiriqui, during election disturbances and subsequent unrest.



1918-20 Soviet Russia. Marines were landed at and near Vladivostok in June and July to protect the American consulate and other points in the fighting between the Bolshevik troops and the Czech Army which had traversed Siberia from the western front. A joint proclamation of emergency government and neutrality was issued by the American, Japanese, British, French, and Czech commanders in July. In August 7,000 men were landed in Vladivostok and remained until January 1920, as part of an allied occupation force. In September 1918, 5,000 American troops joined the allied intervention force at Archangel and remained until June 1919. These operations were in response to the Bolshevik revolution in Russia and were partly supported by Czarist or Kerensky elements.



1919 -- Dalmatia. U.S. forces were landed at Trau at the request of Italian authorities to police order between the Italians and Serbs.



1919 -- Turkey. Marines from the USS Arizona were landed to guard the U.S. Consulate during the Greek occupation of Constantinople.



1919 -- Honduras -- September 8 to 12. A landing force was sent ashore to maintain order in a neutral zone during an attempted revolution.



1920 -- China -- March 14. A landing force was sent ashore for a few hours to protect lives during a disturbance at Kiukiang.



1920 -- Guatemala -- April 9 to 27. U.S. forces protected the American Legation and other American interests, such as the cable station, during a period of fighting between Unionists and the Government of Guatemala.



1920-22 -- Russia (Siberia) -- February 16, 1920, to November 19, 1922. A Marine guard was sent to protect the United States radio station and property on Russian Island, Bay of Vladivostok.



1921 -- Panama -- Costa Rica. American naval squadrons demonstrated in April on both sides of the Isthmus to prevent war between the two countries over a boundary dispute.



1922 -- Turkey -- September and October. A landing force was sent ashore with consent of both Greek and Turkish authorities, to protect American lives and property when the Turkish Nationalists entered Smyrna.



1922-23 -- China. Between April 1922 and November 1923 marines were landed five times to protect Americans during periods of unrest.



1924 -- Honduras -- February 28 to March 31, September 10 to 15. U.S. forces protected American lives and interests during election hostilities.



1924 -- China -- September. Marines were landed to protect Americans and other foreigners in Shanghai during Chinese factional hostilities.



1925 -- China -- January 15 to August 29. Fighting of Chinese factions accompanied by riots and demonstrations in Shanghai brought the landing of American forces to protect lives and property in the International Settlement.



1925 -- Honduras -- April 19 to 21. U.S. forces protected foreigners at La Ceiba during a political upheaval.



1925 -- Panama -- October 12 to 23. Strikes and rent riots led to the landing of about 600 American troops to keep order and protect American interests.



1926 -- China -- August and September. The Nationalist attack on Han brought the landing of American naval forces to protect American citizens. A small guard was maintained at the consulate general even after September 16, when the rest of the forces were withdrawn. Likewise, when Nation forces captured Kiukiang, naval forces were landed for the protection of foreigners November 4 to 6.



1926-33 -- Nicaragua -- May 7 to June 5, 1926; August 27, 1926, to January 1933. The coup d'etat of General Chamorro aroused revolutionary activities leading to the landing of American marines to protect the interests of United States. United States forces came and went intermittently until January 3, 1933. Their work included activity against the outlaw leader Sandino in 1928.



1927 -- China -- February. Fighting at Shanghai caused American naval forces and marines to be increased. In March a naval guard was stationed at American consulate at Nanking after Nationalist forces captured the city. American and British destroyers later used shell fire to protect Americans and other foreigners. Subsequently additional forces of marines and naval forces were stationed in the vicinity of Shanghai and Tientsin.



1932 -- China. American forces were landed to protect American interests during the Japanese occupation of Shanghai.



1933 -- Cuba. During a revolution against President Gerardo Machada naval forces demonstrated but no landing was made.



1934 -- China. Marines landed at Foochow to protect the American Consulate.



1940 -- Newfoundland, Bermuda, St. Lucia, - Bahamas, Jamaica, Antigua, Trinidad, and British Guiana. Troops were sent to guard air and naval bases obtained by negotiation with Great Britain. These were sometimes called lend-lease bases.



1941 -- Greenland. Greenland was taken under protection of the United States in April.



1941 -- Netherlands (Dutch Guiana). In November the President ordered American troops to occupy Dutch Guiana, but by agreement with the Netherlands government in exile, Brazil cooperated to protect aluminum ore supply from the bauxite mines in Surinam.



1941 -- Iceland. Iceland was taken under the protection of the United States



1941 -- Germany. Sometime in the spring the President ordered the Navy to patrol ship lanes to Europe. By July U.S. warships were conveying and September were attacking German submarines. In November, the Neutrality Act was partially repealed to protect U.S. military aid to Britain.1941-45 -- World War II. On December 8, 1941, the United States declared war with Japan, on December 11 with Germany and Italy, and on June 5, 1942, with Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania. The United States declared war against Japan after the surprise bombing of Pearl Harbor, and against Germany and Italy after those nations, under the dictators Hitler and Mussolini, declared war against the United States.



1945 -- China. In October 50,000 U.S. Marines were sent to North China to assist Chinese Nationalist authorities in disarming and repatriating the Japanese in China and in controlling ports, railroads, and airfields. This was in addition to approximately 60,000 U.S. forces remaining in China at the end of World War II.



1946 -- Trieste. President Truman ordered the augmentation of U.S. troops along the zonal occupation line and the reinforcement of air forces in northern Italy after Yugoslav forces shot down an unarmed U.S. Army transport plane flying over Venezia Giulia. Earlier U.S. naval units had been dispatched to the scene.



1948 -- Palestine. A marine consular guard was sent to Jerusalem to protect the U.S. Consul General.



1948 -- Berlin. After the Soviet Union established a land blockade of the U.S., British, and French sectors of Berlin on June 24, 1948, the United States and its allies airlifted supplies to Berlin until after the blockade was lifted in May 1949.



1948-49 -- China. Marines were dispatched to Nanking to protect the American Embassy when the city fell to Communist troops, and to Shanghai to aid in the protection and evacuation of Americans.



1950-53 -- Korean War. The United States responded to North Korean invasion of South Korea by going to its assistance, pursuant to United Nations Security Council resolutions.



1950-55 -- Formosa (Taiwan). In June 1950 at the beginning of the Korean War, President Truman ordered the U.S. Seventh Fleet to prevent Chinese Communist attacks upon Formosa and Chinese Nationalist operations against mainland China.



1954-55 -- China. Naval units evacuated U.S. civilians and military personnel from the Tachen Islands.



1956 -- Egypt. A Marine battalion evacuated U.S. nationals and other persons from Alexandria during the Suez crisis.



1958 -- Lebanon. Marines were landed in Lebanon at the invitation of its government to help protect against threatened insurrection supported from the outside.



1959-60 -- The Caribbean. 2d Marine Ground Task Force was deployed to protect U.S. nationals during the Cuban crisis.



1962 -- Cuba. President Kennedy instituted a "quarantine" on the shipment of offensive missiles to Cuba from the Soviet Union. He also warned Soviet Union that the launching of any missile from Cuba against nations in the Western Hemisphere would bring about U.S. nuclear retaliation on the Soviet Union. A negotiated settlement was achieved in a few days.



1962 -- Thailand. The 3d Marine Expeditionary Unit landed on May 17, 1962 to support that country during the threat of Communist pressure from outside; by Jul 30 the 5000 marines had been withdrawn.



1962-75 -- Laos. From October 1962 until 1976, the United States played a role of military support in Laos.



1964 -- Congo. The United States sent four transport planes to provide airlift for Congolese troops during a rebellion and to transport Belgian paratroopers to rescue foreigners.



1964-73 -- Vietnam War. U.S. military advisers had been in South Vietnam a decade, and their numbers had been increased as the military position the Saigon government became weaker. After the attacks on U.S. destroyers in the Tonkin Gulf, President Johnson asked for a resolution expressing U.S. determination to support freedom and protect peace in Southeast Asia. Congress responded with the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, expressing support for "all necessary measures" the President might take to repel armed attacks against U.S. forces and prevent further aggression. Following this resolution, and following a Communist attack on a U.S. installation in central Vietnam, the United States escalated its participation in the war to a peak of 543 000 in April 1969.



1965 -- Dominican Republic. The United States intervened to protect lives and property during a Dominican revolt and sent more troops as fears grew that the revolutionary forces were coming increasingly under Communist control.



1967 -- Congo. The United States sent three military transport aircraft with crews to provide the Congo central government with logistical support during a revolt.



1970 -- Cambodia. U.S. troops were ordered into Cambodia to clean out Communist sanctuaries from which Viet Cong and North Vietnamese attacked U.S and South Vietnamese forces in Vietnam. The object of this attack, which lasted from April 30 to June 30, was to ensure the continuing safe withdrawal of American forces from South Vietnam and to assist the program of Vietnamization.



1974 -- Evacuation from Cyprus. United States naval forces evacuated U.S. civilians during hostilities between Turkish and Greek Cypriot forces.



1975 -- Evacuation from Vietnam. On April 3, 1975, President Ford reported U.S. naval vessels, helicopters, and Marines had been sent to assist in evacuation of refugees and U.S. nationals from Vietnam. (Note 3)



1975 -- Evacuation from Cambodia. On April 12, 1975, President Ford reported that he had ordered U.S. military forces to proceed with the planned evacuation of U.S. citizens from Cambodia.



1975 -- South Vietnam. On April 30 1975, President Ford reported that a force of 70 evacuation helicopters and 865 Marines had evacuated about 1,400 U.S. citizens and 5,500 third country nationals and South Vietnamese from landing zones near the U.S. Embassy in Saigon and the Tan Son Nhut Airfield.



1975 -- Mayaguez incident. On May 15, 1975, President Ford reported he had ordered military forces to retake the SS Mayaguez, a merchant vessel en route from Hong Kong to Thailand with U.S. citizen crew which was seized from Cambodian naval patrol boats in international waters and forced to proceed to a nearby island.



1976 -- Lebanon. On July 22 and 23, 1974, helicopters from five U.S. naval vessels evacuated approximately 250 Americans and Europeans from Lebanon during fighting between Lebanese factions after an overland convoy evacuation had been blocked by hostilities.



1976 -- Korea. Additional forces were sent to Korea after two American military personnel were killed while in the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea for the purpose of cutting down a tree.



1978 -- Zaire. From May 19 through June 1978, the United States utilized military transport aircraft to provide logistical support to Belgian and French rescue operations in Zaire.



1980 -- Iran. On April 26, 1980, President Carter reported the use of six U.S. transport planes and eight helicopters in an unsuccessful attempt to rescue American hostages being held in Iran.



1981 -- El Salvador. After a guerilla offensive against the government of El Salvador, additional U.S. military advisers were sent to El Salvador, bringing the total to approximately 55, to assist in training government forces in counterinsurgency.



1981 --Libya. On August 19, 1981, U.S. planes based on the carrier Nimitz shot down two Libyan jets over the Gulf of Sidra after one of the Libyan jets had fired a heat-seeking missile. The United States periodically held freedom of navigation exercises in the Gulf of Sidra, claimed by Libya as territorial waters but considered international waters by the United States.



1982 -- Sinai. On March 19, 1982, President Reagan reported the deployment of military personnel and equipment to participate in the Multinational Force and Observers in the Sinai. Participation had been authorized by the Multinational Force and Observers Resolution, Public Law 97-132.



1982 -- Lebanon. On August 21, 1982, President Reagan reported the dispatch of 80 marines to serve in the multinational force to assist in the withdrawal of members of the Palestine Liberation force from Beirut. The Marines left Sept. 20, 1982.



1982 -- Lebanon. On September 29, 1982, President Reagan reported the deployment of 1200 marines to serve in a temporary multinational force to facilitate the restoration of Lebanese government sovereignty. On Sept. 29, 1983, Congress passed the Multinational Force in Lebanon Resolution (P.L. 98-119) authorizing the continued participation for eighteen months.



1983 -- Egypt. After a Libyan plane bombed a city in Sudan on March 18, 1983, and Sudan and Egypt appealed for assistance, the United States dispatched an AWACS electronic surveillance plane to Egypt.



1983-89 -- Honduras. In July 1983 the United States undertook a series of exercises in Honduras that some believed might lead to conflict with Nicaragua. On March 25, 1986, unarmed U.S. military helicopters and crewmen ferried Honduran troops to the Nicaraguan border to repel Nicaraguan troops.



1983 -- Chad. On August 8, 1983, President Reagan reported the deployment of two AWACS electronic surveillance planes and eight F-15 fighter planes and ground logistical support forces to assist Chad against Libyan and rebel forces.



1983 -- Grenada. On October 25, 1983, President Reagan reported a landing on Grenada by Marines and Army airborne troops to protect lives and assist in the restoration of law and order and at the request of five members of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States.



1984 -- Persian Gulf. On June 5, 1984, Saudi Arabian jet fighter planes, aided by intelligence from a U.S. AWACS electronic surveillance aircraft and fueled by a U.S. KC-10 tanker, shot down two Iranian fighter planes over an area of the Persian Gulf proclaimed as a protected zone for shipping.



1985 -- Italy . On October 10, 1985, U.S. Navy pilots intercepted an Egyptian airliner and forced it to land in Sicily. The airliner was carrying the hijackers of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro who had killed an American citizen during the hijacking.



1986 --Libya. On March 26, 1986, President Reagan reported to Congress that, on March 24 and 25, U.S. forces, while engaged in freedom of navigation exercises around the Gulf of Sidra, had been attacked by Libyan missiles and the United States had responded with missiles.



1986 -- Libya. On April 16, 1986, President Reagan reported that U.S. air and naval forces had conducted bombing strikes on terrorist facilities and military installations in Libya.



1986 -- Bolivia. U.S. Army personnel and aircraft assisted Bolivia in anti-drug operations.



1987-88 -- Persian Gulf. After the Iran-Iraq War resulted in several military incidents in the Persian Gulf, the United States increased U.S. Navy forces operating in the Persian Gulf and adopted a policy of reflagging and escorting Kuwaiti oil tankers through the Gulf. President Reagan reported that U.S. ships had been fired upon or struck mines or taken other military action on September 23, October 10, and October 20, 1987 and April 19, July 4, and July 14, 1988. The United States gradually reduced its forces after a cease-fire between Iran and Iraq on August 20, 1988.



1988 -- Panama. In mid-March and April 1988, during a period of instability in Panama and as pressure grew for Panamanian military leader General Manuel Noriega to resign, the United States sent 1,000 troops to Panama, to "further safeguard the canal, U.S. lives, property and interests in the area." The forces supplemented 10,000 U.S. military personnel already in Panama.



1989 -- Libya. On January 4, 1989, two U.S. Navy F-14 aircraft based on USS John F. Kennedy shot down two Libyan jet fighters over the Mediterranean Sea about 70 miles north of Libya. The U.S. pilots said the Libyan planes had demonstrated hostile intentions.



1989 -- Panama. On May 11, 1989, in response to General Noriega's disregard of the results of the Panamanian election, President Bush ordered a brigade- sized force of approximately 1,900 troops to augment the estimated 11,000 U.S. forces already in the area.



1989 -- Andean Initiative in War on Drugs. On September 15, 1989, President Bush announced that military and law enforcement assistance would be sent to help the Andean nations of Colombia, Bolivia, and Peru combat illicit drug producers and traffickers. By mid-September there were 50- 100 U.S. military advisers in Colombia in connection with transport and training in the use of military equipment, plus seven Special Forces teams of 2-12 persons to train troops in the three countries.



1989 -- Philippines. On December 2, 1989, President Bush reported that on December 1 U.S. fighter planes from Clark Air Base in the Philippines had assisted the Aquino government to repel a coup attempt. In addition, 100 marines were sent from the U.S. Navy base at Subic Bay to protect the U.S. Embassy in Manila.



1989 -- Panama. On December 21, 1989, President Bush reported that he had ordered U.S. military forces to Panama to protect the lives of American citizens and bring General Noriega to justice. By February 13, 1990, all the invasion forces had been withdrawn.



1990 -- Liberia. On August 6, 1990, President Bush reported that a reinforced rifle company had been sent to provide additional security to the U.S. Embassy in Monrovia, and that helicopter teams had evacuated U.S. citizens from Liberia.



1990 -- Saudi Arabia. On August 9, 1990, President Bush reported that he had ordered the forward deployment of substantial elements of the U.S. armed forces into the Persian Gulf region to help defend Saudi Arabia after the August 2 invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. On November 16, 1990, he reported the continued buildup of the forces to ensure an adequate offensive military option.



1991 -- Iraq. On January 18, 1991, President Bush reported that he had directed U.S. armed forces to commence combat operations on January 16 against Iraqi forces and military targets in Iraq and Kuwait, in conjunction with a coalition of allies and U.N. Security Council resolutions. On January 12 Congress had passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq Resolution (P.L. 102-1). Combat operations were suspended on February 28, 1991.



1991 -- Iraq. On May 17, 1991, President Bush stated in a status report to Congress that the Iraqi repression of the Kurdish people had necessitated a limited introduction of U.S. forces into northern Iraq for emergency relief purposes.



1991 -- Zaire. On September 25-27, 1991, after widespread looting and rioting broke out in Kinshasa, U.S. Air Force C-141s transported 100 Belgian troops and equipment into Mnshasa. U.S. planes also carried 300 French troops into the Central African Republic and hauled back American citizens and third country nationals from locations outside Zaire.



1992 -- Sierra Leone. On May 3, 1992, U.S. military planes evacuated Americans from Sierra Leone, where military leaders had overthrown the government.



1992 -- Kuwait. On August 3, 1992, the United States began a series of military exercises in Kuwait, following Iraqi refusal to recognize a new border drawn up by the United Nations and refusal to cooperate with U.N. inspection teams.



1992 -- Iraq. On September 16, 1992 President Bush stated in a status report that he had ordered U.S. participation in the enforcement of a prohibition against Iraqi flights in a specified zone in southern Iraq, and aerial reconnaissance to monitor Iraqi compliance with the cease-fire resolution.



1992 -- Somalia. On December 10, 1992, President Bush reported that he had deployed U.S. armed forces to Somalia in response to a humanitarian crisis and a U.N. Security Council Resolution determining that the situation constituted a threat to international peace. This operation, called Operation Restore Hope, was part of a U.S.-led United Nations Unified Task Force (UNITAF) and came to an end on May 4, 1993. U.S. forces continued to participate in the successor United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM II), which the U.N. Security Council authorized to assist Somalia in political reconciliation and restoration of peace.



1993 -- Iraq. On January 19, 1993, President Bush said in a status report that on December 27, 1992, U.S. aircraft shot down an Iraqi aircraft in the prohibited zone; on January 13 aircraft from the United States and coalition partners had attacked missile bases in southern Iraq; and further military actions had occured on January 17 and 18. Administration officials said the United States was deploying a battalion task force to Kuwait to underline the continuing U.S. commitment to Kuwaiti independence.



1993 -- Iraq. On January 21, 1993, shortly after his inauguration, President Clinton said the United States would continue the Bush policy on Iraq, and U.S. aircraft fired at targets in Iraq after pilots sensed Iraqi radar or anti-aircraft fire directed at them.



1993 -- Bosnia-Hercegovina. On February 28, 1993, the United States bagan an airdrop of relief supplies aimed at Muslims surrounded by Serbian forces in Bosnia.



1993 -- Bosnia-Hercegovina. On April 13, 1993, President Clinton reported U.S. forces were participating in a NATO air action to enforce a U.N. ban on all unauthorized military flights over Bosnia-Hercegovina.



1993 -- Iraq. In a status report on Iraq of May 24, President Clinton said that on April 9 and April 18 U.S. warplanes had bombed or fired missiles at Iraqi anti-aircraft sites which had tracked U.S. aricraft.



1993 -- Somalia. On June 10, 1993, President Clinton reported that in response to attacks against U.N. forces in Somalia by a factional leader, the U.S. Quick Reaction Force in the area had participated in military action to quell the violence. The quick reaction force was part of the U.S. contribution to a success On July 1, President Clinton reported further air and ground military operations on June 12 and June 17 aimed at neutralizing military capabilities that had impeded U.N. efforts to deliver humanitarian relief and promote national reconstruction, and additional instances occurred in the following months.



1993 -- Iraq. On June 28, 1993, President Clinton reported that on June 26 U.S. naval forces had launched missiles against the Iraqi Intelligence Service's headquarters in Baghdad in response to an unsuccessful attempt to assassinate former President Bush in Kuwait in April 1993.



1993 -- Iraq. In a status report of July 22, 1993, President Clinton said on June 19 a U.S. aircraft had fired a missile at an Iraqi anti-aircraft site displaying hostile intent. U.S. planes also bombed an Iraqi missile battery on August 19, 1993.



1993 -- Macedonia. On July 9, 1993, President Clinton reported the deployment of 350 U.S. armed forces to Macedonia to participate in the U.N. Protection Force to help maintain stability in the area of former Yugoslavia.


YOU LOSE, STORMIN NORMAN!

[Stormin Norman]

Although you produced a rather lengthy list of U.S. military actions you failed to demonstrate exactly how these actions accomplished the objective of setting up direct "rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies". Since I have already conceded the point that America engaged in some imperial conquest during the 19th and early 20th century, let's remain focused on post 1930. However, I do believe many of the examples listed prior to that date also fail to depict a policy of U.S. hegemony. For example:

1823 -- Cuba. Brief landings in pursuit of pirates occurred April 8 near Escondido; April 16 near Cayo Blanco; July 11 at Siquapa Bay; July 21 at Cape Cruz; and October 23 at Camrioca.

Explain how chasing pirates accounts for imperialism. In addition, much of the territorial acquisition during that time period was the result of legitimate war, whereby the loser agreed to a loss in real estate. Again this does not represent the actions of an empire. The two modes of war remain different. Therefore examples such as this must be thrown out:

1836 -- Mexico. General Gaines occupied Nacogdoches (Tex.), disputed territory, from July to December during the Texan war for independence, under orders to cross the "imaginary boundary line" if an Indian outbreak threatened.

Texas independence does not follow the modus operandi of imperial dominance. I would also remind you that the War of 1812 was a result of British aggression, so it can not be counted either.

Dyermaker was also trying to use this as an example:

1820-23 -- Africa. Naval units raided the slave traffic pursuant to the 1819 act of Congress.

Enforcing the 1819 ban on the shipment of slaves is now considered by leftists as the act of an aggressive empire, huh? The more you try to revise history the worse you make yourselves look. I am baffled that he would consider such a move to be the result of dominance over a people.

Overall, I see a pretty expansive list of U.S. military actions, but nothing that would lead me to believe that my prior conclusion was erroneous in any way.

Now I understand why dyermaker felt the need to yell, "YOU LOSE, STORMIN NORMAN" at the end of his post. His post fails to speak for itself. Therefore, he thought that such a move would improve his argument. If you would like to debate some of the facts surrounding these incidents, I would be more than ablige, but it's still too early for you to declare victory. I notice you leftist use this tactic a lot. Trust me, it doesn't strengthen your argument at all. This type of action only serves to make you look insecure in your position. That is why I don't do it, even if I beat the living shit out of you in the debate. It is more credible to allow your argument to speak for itself. That advice comes free to you as a friendly jesture. Take it or leave it.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 1:12 am on Jan. 10, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

"The average imigrant is a prime example of the residue left over by capitalism............poverty."-Pastradamus

Here Pastradamus makes a ridiculous claim. Does he fail to recognize that most of the immigrants in our country come from places unfortunate enough never to know the benefits of capitalism. Let's put the quote in context, shall we? Capitalist Imperialist was talking about the number of Mexican nationals in his area. The left bluntly accused him of being upper class and dismissed his ideas promptly. It was during this conversation that the above statement was made by the said party. This fact makes the quote even worse, because Pastradamus was referring to Mexicans. I assert that the poverty is not the result of free-market capitalism, and that Patradamus proves his ignorance of history by making such a claim.

Actually, Pastradamus was half right. Mexico adopted an economic system known as state capitalism soon after the Revolution of 1910. After Cardenas fever swept the nation and he implemented sweeping reforms (from 1930-1940) likened to Mao's communist revolution, the country took to a form of state capitalism known as import substituting industrialization (ISI). This was due to the fact that economic growth had declined when the Mexican government nationalized certain industries, scaring away foriegn investors. Although this liberal view of state capitalism was meant to ignite further investment from outside countries, the government still presented an overbearing presence in the markets.

Much like China today, they clung to socialist ideals while simultaneously relaxing controls on private enterprise. Too little too late. Intitlement programs, government subsidies, and a corporatist system for articulating interest all contributed to the inertial state of both the economy and the political system. Using what Trotsky dubbed "state capitalism", and reducing reliance on an agro-export model proved catastrophic.

Anyone with an ability to think would recognize that it was the directed economic model produced under the auspice of utilitarianism that destroyed that nation. The madness remains as America's liberals seek to follow a model more closely related to Mexico's state capitalism, rather than the free-market principles that have been proven to work in the U.S. Question is; will these socialists ever learn? Judging by my time on this board, I don't see much hope for that. The willfully ignorant will continue to remain willfully ignorant. It's sad really.

[Stormin Norman]

"Americanism is a self-centered culture. A culture that's literaly manufactured to serve the interests of capitalism. To serve the interests of the state, to serve the intersts of those who sit at the very top, point the finger, stroke the pens, and oppress the bottom.

We are fucking servents. "-antigovernment

Now we have a moron that claims America to be a self-centered culture. Then they contradict themselves by claiming that we are all bred to serve the interests of other, more powerful people. Which is it are we self-sacrificing servants of the state, or do we serve our own interests?

This baffoon goes so far as to call us all servants. Speak for yourself, antigovernment, I serve the causes and purposes that I choose on my own behalf. Most of the time they are self-serving, since I am my own person, and my own hapiness remains the reference state by which I judge the world around me. However, by watching out for those interests important to me, others benefit from my pursuits. Sometimes it is in my interest to help those that I care about, but I must first make that value judgement before I can offer my assistance willingly.

It is your ideology that seeks to make us slaves because it doesn't allow one to make that value judgement. It demands all people sacrifice in an unequal fashion to derive the greatest misery for the greatest number. By not being able to make the most simple decision about who I care to help, your system offers to take away my freedom of choice, to sacrifice my individuality for the hapiness of people incapable of finding hapiness outside the demise of others.

The cost of your system is simple, my hapiness for the good of the collective. Tell me. How will I judge the value of my own life when I try to use the views of the collective as a reference frame? Wouldn't such an attempt drive me further away from knowing my own purpose, my own worth, and my own thought? Wouldn't such a system drive someone like myself into a perpetual state of misery?

I suppose that is a small price to pay for someone like yourself, who is already so miserable. If only you could drag the rest of humanity down to your pathetic level, then maybe it wouldn't be so bad. I would suggest that you would be doing humanity a great favor by removing yourself rather than forcing them to fit into your horrid mind.

[Stormin Norman]

"The US is a pile of crap"-Mentalbunny

[RedComrade]

Norm i speak for myself and assumedly the rest of my comrades when saying that I do not beleive America is an empire in the traditonal since with colonies, direct control and the like. However I do not think in modern times any superpower would do this nor would they have to to maintain a reasonable amount of control on other weaker countries. More importantly the u.s is imperialist in the since that it excersises indirect control over other nations and uses its power to affect the affairs of other weaker nations. In the last century america did more to coerce and covertly control the global community than any other nation on the earth. Multiple democratic regimes saw their downfall at the hands of cia backed coups only to be replaced with brutal military dictatorships. Progressive regimes such as the sandinistas and the hope they brought to their peoples were destroyed by criminal armies like the contras (who were in reality the brutal elite guard of the previous ruler somoza with a name change) armed, funded, and provoked by the cia. America is an imperialist nation because it uses its position as a leading power to influence other weaker nations. Note that i did not go on about the evils of this or even say wether it is good or bad (personally i see this as bad and a threat to progress and democracy but this is not the point and has nothing to do with it). For good or bad you just cant deny the U.S as being imperialist in nature...

[suffianr]

The strength of criticism lies in the weakness of the things you criticize...

What's your point with these sort of threads, SN?

What new games are you trying to play?

Pointing out your adversaries weaknesses does not, in any way, increase your own credibility. It just shows what nit-picking bastrads some people can be...

[synthesis]

The fact that you ostensibly read what I posted gives me hope for you, Stormin Norman.

However, you made one large and incorrect assumption.

I didn't write that article. It's copied and pasted and comes from someone within the U.S. government who was likely disinterested at best. It's meant to be a complete list of U.S. interference with other sovereign nations, not neccessarily condemning.

Therefore, statements like these are incorrect:

Dyermaker was also trying to use this as an example

Enforcing the 1819 ban on the shipment of slaves is now considered by leftists as the act of an aggressive empire, huh?

I am baffled that he would consider such a move to be the result of dominance over a people.


Et cetera.

The reason I posted the article (with no editing at all to remove actions that I do not disagree with) was not neccessarily the content but merely the sheer volume of interventions the U.S. has committed.

Namely, over the course of a little over two centuries, America has intervened in the affairs of other countries over 250 times.

And you can honestly say this isn't imperialism?

[Eastside Revolt]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 3:15 pm on Jan. 9, 2003
"Americanism is a self-centered culture. A culture that's literaly manufactured to serve the interests of capitalism. To serve the interests of the state, to serve the intersts of those who sit at the very top, point the finger, stroke the pens, and oppress the bottom.

We are fucking servents. "-antigovernment

Now we have a moron that claims America to be a self-centered culture.


Stormin' Normin all of Canada is laughing at you from our igloos.

[RedComrade]

"As a benevolent and sovereign empire, the United States reserves the right to maintain and extend its sphere of influence and protect its interests wherever they are." Capitalist Imperial on the U.S Backed Coup Forum

Finally Norm one of your comrades openly speaks his mind and the sad truth about America intentions and actions in the world. Can someone say 1984.....

[Stormin Norman]

"Ahem, sorry can you please explain to me how someone owns a piece of land?" - bombeverything

Moron! Ever heard of a title?

[Stormin Norman]

Finally Norm one of your comrades openly speaks his mind and the sad truth about America intentions and actions in the world. Can someone say 1984.....

First of all, I have friends, not comrades. Secondly, I don't disagree that the U.S. has a right to protect its interest. I would recomend that my country choose its interests wisely, and quit dishing the dole out to every second rate country that exists. Nothing CI said led me to rehash Orwell's "1984".

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 3:35 am on Jan. 15, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

"I figured you had no idea what supply side economics was...the theory is TO INCREASE GOVERNMENT SPENDING and decrease taxes." - antieverything

Sorry, I hate to do this to you buddy, but your characterization of supply-sided economics is wrong. If it's any consolation, I don't think you are as dumb as some of the others I have quoted here. You simply had the wrong idea. Hopefully that misconception was corrected in the "Supply-Sided Economics" thread you started. I must say that I have my suspicions that you diliberately distorted the truth, as you used all caps to highlight the precise part of your statement that remains dead wrong.

[Stormin Norman]

"The problem with people having their fingers hovering over the button of world destruction is that they might get jogged (hope you understand what I mean!) and press the button accidentally!"-Mentalbunny

This quote finds itself here for obvious reasons. I won't even justify such idiocy by pointing out how this is an ignorant statement. Those of you who do not know will have to remain ignorant. Sorry folks, but I can't teach you everything. Sometimes I feel as if I am working with a tabla rasa when dealing with liberals.

[Stormin Norman]

"i support the bombing of pearl harbour."-AK47

Do I even need to comment about this one? That is probably the grand-daddy statement I have been looking for. It speaks for itself. Commie scum.


(Edited by Stormin Norman at 8:27 am on Jan. 15, 2003)

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from redcanada on 5:53 am on Jan. 11, 2003

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 3:15 pm on Jan. 9, 2003
"Americanism is a self-centered culture. A culture that's literaly manufactured to serve the interests of capitalism. To serve the interests of the state, to serve the intersts of those who sit at the very top, point the finger, stroke the pens, and oppress the bottom.

We are fucking servents. "-antigovernment

Now we have a moron that claims America to be a self-centered culture.


Stormin' Normin all of Canada is laughing at you from our igloos.


as if we give a flying canuck what canada thinks

canada is our lap dog, and nothing more

[Moskitto]

ak-47 is not a communist, he's a socialist at most, he's just extremely anti-american/french

[Stormin Norman]

"Aaaaaaawwww, bless, SN still lives in the world where nobody lies, especially the government, and all opinions you see in news articles are 100% correct and unbiased. Yes, thats right, even the ones with a little Imperialist flag in the corner."-Corpus Covax

I think even my worst enemies on this board would disagree with this statement, but I thought I might bring it in here, and open it up for debate. Give me adequate reasons for why you agree or disagree. Are these allegations based on anything substantial? I have already defended myself on the matter, but I would like some feedback.

No people, even I am not immune to criticism. Now I ask for you to give me a general critique about the integrity with which I pursue debates on this bulletin board. Let's keep this in the realm of intelligent discussion, please.

[RedComrade]

From what Ive read of your arguments many times you seem to avoid the argument and focus of sarcasm and witty remarks. I have not been here long though...

[RedComrade]

For those who wish to understand my position use pages 12 through 14 i think of this thread as evidence i got a lot of qoutes on Norm I felt explain my position. While you explained a few of them many of them many of them have cought the capitalist in the act although im sure everyone on here left and right has his share of shit to spread on them that is why this thread is not needed evry1 should no by now ppl on both the left and right are gnna say stupid shit sometimes...

[RedComrade]

"F*** you Dyer Maker F*** you again Dyer Maker F*** you to death Dyer Maker"- Capitalist Imperial
This is the kind of shit that helps to completely undermine any credibility you have on here CI have you ever recomended a book to someone even though you disagreed with a passage here and there. You no as well as I do that article was posted to expose the gross injustice of the american prison system not to glorify the journalists endorsement of 911. If you have ?'s about wether or not Dyermakers was endorsing that one sentence ask him first before you go off like a pyschic interpretting what Dyermaker thinks and deteriorate in to barely comprehendable 6th grader bullshit!

[RedComrade]

"I think it is high time America cleanse itself of this type of human garbage"- Stormin Norman
This is quite possibly the scariest shit I have heard Norm say as of yet. That cleanse part brings up some terrible recolections of past governments "cleansings". If you love this country Norm than you should understand the best thing about it is that theoretically you can say whatever you like and no matter how unpopular it is you wont end up "cleansed". If you ever took power Norm or someone else with the cleansing idea took power and they tried to put into affect cleansings of radicals on my soil wether the radicals be fascists or stalinists or fundamentalists I would fight to death to destroy your Gestapo bullshit and ensure that evry man be he nazi, stalinist, islamic fundamentalist, or moderate has the right to a voice without ending up in a"cleansing facility". May you and those like you never come to power here or nywer!!!

(Edited by RedComrade at 9:46 pm on Jan. 15, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

"I think it is high time America cleanse itself of this type of human garbage"- Stormin Norman
This is quite possibly the scariest shit I have heard Norm say as of yet. That cleanse part brings up some terrible recolections of past governments "cleansings". If you love this country Norm than you should understand the best thing about it is that theoretically you can say whatever you like and no matter how unpopular it is you wont end up "cleansed". If you ever took power Norm or someone else with the cleansing idea took power and they tried to put into affect cleansings of radicals on my soil wether the radicals be fascists or stalinists or fundamentalists I would fight to death to destroy your Gestapo bullshit and ensure that evry man be he nazi, stalinist, islamic fundamentalist, or moderate has the right to a voice without ending up in a"cleansing facility". May you and those like you never come to power here or nywer!!!

I stand behind that statement 100%, although not in the mass murdering connotation that you suggest. As we have external enemies, we also have internal enemies. The internal threat comes from immigrants and anti-American left-wingers. These are people who see our freedom as a weakness and aim to exploit it. They cite the first amendment while they speak sedition. Let me remind you that plotting the destruction of the system is not protected speech. In war times it becomes extremely important to monitor the actions and intentions of potential domestic threats.

It is undeniable that there exists a growing faction among the population of the U.S. dedicated to undermining the U.S. civil society, government institutions, and underlying ideals of the American nation. When the war dice have been rolled, there is no predetermined outcome and the stakes remain high. The worst scenario, in this case, is the destruction of the greatest endeavor of liberty ever embarked upon by a segment of humanity. Many times it is fear for this type of human condition that drives those who aim to destroy the United States, and it is this freedom that I aim to protect, sometimes through the use of extreme measures. A number of times in our history we have had to resort to methodology that appears contradictory to the ideals those measures were aimed at protecting.

Let me direct you to the U.S. Sedition Act of 1918; Section 3:

Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, or to promote the success of its enemies, or shall willfully make or convey false reports, or false statements, . . . or incite insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct . . . the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, or . . . shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States . . . or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy, or shall willfully . . . urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production . . . or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated and whoever shall by word or act support or favor the cause of any country with which the United States is at war or by word or act oppose the cause of the United States therein, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both…

Clearly, a distinction was made regarding the types of speech that this law was aimed at destroying. What this law did not protect was seditious attempts to undermine the U.S. government, or speech designed to weaken the morale of our armed forces, or the resolve of the nation at large. Did this action have a negative effect on civil liberties? To those who enjoy and cherish the freedom’s granted under the 1st amendment, probably not. More than likely they found themselves more involved in actions that benefited the country rather than emboldening the enemy. However, certain opinions were probably held back for fear of prosecution, so it did act to hinder the expression of ideas. Like it or not, the Sedition Act definitely had the cleansing effect to which I was referring.

I have a question to ask those leftists that wanted to believe my statement was a reference to politicide. Apparently you have a very healthy fear of being persecuted for your thoughts. However, you protect a political and economic system that has proven to be the most efficient model for killing those who oppose the state. Why is this? Do I dare say that you support it, so long as the type of thought targeted runs anti to yours? Why do you protect Saddam, a man who is guilty of removing the tongues of those that offer the slightest criticism of his method of rule; and demonize a man who is willing to take action to remove his terror from the world? Could it be that you only care about the 1st amendment, so long as it allows for your movement to expand to the point where you can desecrate the Bill of Rights, and commit the type politicide that communists are so famous for? When does the left quit trying to separate the results from the model used? Marxism was the model used by Stalinists, and Maoist alike.

I know there are some here that would like nothing more than to label me a Nazi and dismiss me. Now was I referring to a new Sedition Act when I suggested t hat vermin supporting anti-Americanism represent a problem that must be cleansed? No. I, like those on the left, propose we use the 1st amendment, but as a tool for the destruction of our enemies. An atmosphere has been created where enemies of the U.S. feel comfortable in vocalizing their perverted viewpoints. It is obvious that the views one espouses can be used as an indicator of where their loyalties lie. I would never suggest that we start locking people up for having a dissenting opinion, for I often hold unpopular views. However, a person’s ideas can provide insight into the types of actions, or the activities that they may be engaged in. A criminal mind will more than likely lead to criminal activities. Once a person identifies themselves as an enemy of the United States, investigators can then try to charge them with the commission of whatever crimes they might be involved in. That is, if they happen to exist. By evaluating the speech coming from different segments of the population, you can then narrow the scope of the search and allocate law enforcement resources wisely.

I have long been an advocate for our system of government. To hear my enemies, who support the vilest system of government, allege that I support the types of acts that I am committed to fighting disgusts me. I suggest we use a system of justice to defeat those who present a credible threat to our way of life, not mass graves. I hope this clears the air.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 4:02 am on Jan. 19, 2003)

[antieverything]

Norm, do you deny the fact that a major tenet of supply-side economics is that lower taxes increase tax revenues? What the hell do you think that government plans to do with these revenues...give them to the needy? Is it not true that supply-side economics is a creation of the second half of the twentieth century? Is it not true that this new theory of economics is different in any way to standard conservative economics? Doesn't this difference lie in the fact that supply-side economics claims to be a win win win (lower taxes, increased tax revenues, low inflation) situation while conservative economics focuses on lower taxes/less government spending and keeps the argument somewhat in reality?

If you think that all previous conservative politicians and economists were supply-siders you are dead wrong. When Reagan took office there were only 12 supply-side economists in the country! Do you not think that this was because the claims were simply too good to be true?
[hr]
Here's a good one:

"...income taxes are high [in the United States]."
-Capitalist Imperial

What? Compared to where? Americans--including the rich--pay lower taxes than the people of any advanced industrialized country in the world!

Or this one...

"America in #1 in: Home ownership..."
-Capitalist Imperial

Actually the US is in number 13, behind most of western Europe!

[Stormin Norman]

Once again, Micheal de Panama finds his way onto my ignorant statements page. It appears that everytime he opens his mouth something ignorant pops out. Here is his latest:

"I thought it was especially ironic that he mentioned how we will provide the Iraqi people with food, medicine, and clothing, just as we did the Afghans, when the only reason the Iraqi people are without food, medicine, and clothing is the trade embargo we ourselves have imposed on them to weaken their economy."

Holy smokes! How dumb are you? Do I need to get the State Department facts on this matter. I know I have presented them to you before. If Saddam didn't have the ability to feed his people, how can he afford all of the extravagant palaces to commemorate himself. He starves his own people to fool idiots like yourself into thinking he is the victim in all this. The illegal oil shipments to places like France alone provides more than enough money to feed all of his people. You smuck!

[Stormin Norman]

"As for Isalmic fundamentalists--we could appease them in two very courageous acts:

1. Pulling troops from Saudi Arabia out of respect for Mecca.

2. Stop aiding Isreal." - j

This utter nonsense is a prime example of what this thread is dedicated to exposing. Firstly, j proposes that we try to appease terrorists by making concessions, a prospect that is ludicrous in and of itself. Next, he makes a few suggestions about how we should do it. Does he not realize that we are fighting a war with people who are hell bent on destroying the United States.

Damaged U.S.-Saudi relations is just one of the many goals that al Qaeda seeks in this assault on our way of life. Perhaps the withdrawl of American troops from Saudi would have been a good idea prior to 9-11, but if we were to do it now, al Qaeda would get the idea that they were winning.

By granting concessions to terrorists you show them that they have an effective means of affecting change. If terrorism is seen as an efficient mode of dictating policy, as it has been in the case of Arafat and others, incidents of terrorism will most likely increase, as it has in recent years.

The appeasement of madmen is an impossible venture. None of the goals named by al Qaeda, or any other terrorist organization should ever be considered, if we truly want to defeat the international terrorist networks.

This is why I consider most of the leftist on this board to be anti-American. All of the ideas that they promote are paralleled directly with the socialists of Europe, the communists of the world, and the terrorist networks that are determined to destory my way of life, which is the American way of life. Al Qaeda couldn't have run a better propaganda campaign itself. Leave it to the anti-Americans within our own borders to do it for them, pro bono.

[Stormin Norman]

"It's why Republicans love Black people."-Umoja

Another baseless accusation coming from the left. In an attempt to demonize the more conservative party, Umoja typically repeats another big lie perpetrated by the socialist scum within our borders. Their claim that the Republicans are racist is on the same level as saying the the U.S. government deliberately set up Iraq's bio-chemical weapons programs.

From what I have seen, the Republicans place no real importance on the color of a person's skin. Anyone who agrees with their conservative thinking is seen as a likely ally. They do not discriminate when it comes to the diversity of backgrounds they would like to have supporting their worldview.

What is true, is the fact that the Democrats constantly use race, class, and other societal cleavages to their advantage. They use social programs to ensure that beneficiaries of their wasteful programs continue to support them at the voting booth. They constantly lie and distort the facts with the intent of dividing the nation up into categories.

They are the inventors of one of the most racist government sanctioned programs that has ever existed, namely affirmative action. They are the inventors of the hiephenated American. They continue to dominate the realm of public education, where a constant dumbing down of Americans has occurred. It is easy to see how ignorance and failure in America benefit this party of socialists.

When the Republicans wanted to appoint a Mexican to a District Court position, the Democratic majority, under Tom Dascle, blocked his confirmation to the courts. When Clarence Thomas, a black conservative was appointed to the Supreme Court, the Democrats used sexism as a way to smear a good man's name. The democrats only like diversity as long as the views held promote their anti-American agenda. As soon as somebody like Colin Powell exposes themselves as a conservative, these divisive characters call him an uncle Tom and expose themselves as the racists that they are.

It is easy to see who the race baiters are in this country. They are the party that insists that we yield reparations to a population that was not enslaved, a demographic that has all the same opportunities as any other American. They seek to punish the taxpayer that had no part in the racists policies of the past. They ignore the hundred of thousands of American lives lost, during the Civil War, in an attempt to rectify a hypocritical inaccuracy between the underlying foundation of the nation, and the actual policies in place. They seek to set the nation back by instilling resentment across racial lines, at the risk of starting an all out race war. It is easy to see that it is the Democrats who are the racists in this country. Why 90% of the black population continues to vote for them is something I will never understand. Perhaps it is the result of the socilization that occurs in the poorly run public school system.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 11:12 pm on Feb. 2, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

"I dunno, it is only 7 people, in the big picture it matters zip and in the small picture it doesnt matter that much more. I mean, sure, its sad for the families but i can't say i really care. The whole thing seems very suspicious to me, to tell the truth. For one thing- what a fortunate coincidence that Andrew Card just happened to have the TV on and just happened to decide to turn on the NASA channel (despite the fact that there are like a billion other channels he could have decided to get his kicks from), coincidentally enough just in time to watch it explode."-Broadass88 (Boadice88)

-This statement speaks for itself.

[Stormin Norman]

"Thomas Jefferson wanted a system based not on economic status, but on ability as a worker-the agricultural idea similar to a marxist theory." - Rastafari

The idea of the self-determined yeoman farmer and government owned farms are two different things entirely. This pothead seems to have a poor understanding of American history. The comparison he is trying to make is not only wrong, it's pure lunacy.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 7:57 pm on Feb. 2, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

Truthaddict posted this poem from some dumbass, know-nothing, idiot. It is probably the most ignorant poem I have ever read. There is nothing poetic about it. I hope this moron didn't quit his day job.


Iraq
"Vengeance is mine, I will repay... if your enemies are hungry. feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink; for by doing this you will heap burning coals on thier heads."
Romans 12: 19-20

Males and one woman
sip coffee mornings in the White House,
talk of desires about Iraq.
For ten years
Less-than-Elected-Vice-President Cheney
evolves The Plan,
the Empire of the United States of America

Empire building requires "pre-emptive strikes"
When is the strategic time to promote a stike against Iraq?
Not Summer,
not with Less-than-Elected-President Bush vactioning in Crawford,
ensconced in his golf cart,
quipping "crawfished" about Saddam Hussein.

"From a marketing point of view,"
says the White House Chief of Staff,
"you dont introduce new products in August."

Oil waits in the Iraqi womb,
second biggest oil field in the earth.

Think of the Oklahoma bombing.
Whom did the bomber call "Collateral Damage"?
Children.
Think of bombing and invading Iraq.
Half of Iraq's population
CHILDREN.

Maxwell Corydon Wheat Jr.

Compare that piece of crap to Rudyard Kipling's If.

If

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat these two imposters just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: `Hold on!'

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man, my son!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Now that's a masterpiece worthy of remembering.

I also like Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night by Dylan Thomas.

DO NOT GO GENTLE INTO THAT GOOD NIGHT

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rage at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
----------------------------------------------------

Yes, there was a day whe poetry was not a partisan venture. All classical works of poetry have a universal ring to them, something that resonates through all of humanity, works not meant to alienate decent human beings, works that indicate the existence of universal truths known to all of humanity. Now days, poets are the worst of humanity, comprised of left wing pinkos with nothing of value to say. Most of what is considered poetry these days is actually free association, a conglomeration of words tied together in a random fashion without any clear meaning. I submit that the arts have diminished since the art world was tied to what is known as the bleeding heart. Before the bleeding hearts destroyed one of humanities greatest expressions, good art was tied to greatness of achievement, knowledge of the mind, science of the craft, wisdom, and the human spirit. Much like many aspects of the world today, degenerates have infiltrated the art world and applied a newer and less important definition of what is is to be called art. Another great example of how the left seeks to destroy that which is good.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 11:30 pm on Feb. 2, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

"First of all if you would like to tell where Stalin surpressed free speech I would greatly appreciate it?" - Cassius Clay

Now that is the epitome of ignorant questions.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 12:05 am on Feb. 3, 2003)

[Blibblob]

lol,

can you add a couple of mine?

[Stormin Norman]

"I mean, what have Space Experiments, conducted from outside of our atmosphere really produced over all this time for anybody. Now don't give all this silly putty, velchro, and all of the other useless suburbanities that were spun out of land based trials, even though silly putty can copy newspaper if you put it on it, it provides little to no benefits to starving people in Cambodia, or the children who are born with aids in Angola, does it." - Rastafari

Clueless. Rastafari fails to see the benefits of science, exploration, innovation, and knowledge. He doesn't seem to understand that certains goals of the space program can only be met through the use of manned missions. While using fiber optics to communicate with people half way around the world, he ignores the contribution that space exploration has had to our understanding of particle physics, and communication using wave properties. This is, of course, yet another ignoramus who gravitates to Che-lives for the purpose of spouting off unsubstantiated lies, and overwhelming ignorance. I suggest, if attitudes like Rastafari's continue to gain momentum, we will in fact enter into another Dark Age.

[abstractmentality]

in a reply to the stormin norman quote of Umoja about republicans, i will quote Shannon Reeves, Californias GOP party secretary in an email to state republican board members:
"Black republicans are expeted to provide window dressing and cover to prove that this is not a racist party, yet our own leadership continues to act otherwise.
"When i travel to speak at republican conferences and events around the country, wandering through hotels, conventions centesr and social clubs, as i approach the rooms where im scheduled to speak, ai am often told by republicans that i must be in the wrong place....
"As a bush delegate at the 2000 convention in philadelphia, i proudly wore my delegate's badge and (republican national committee) lapel pin at i worked the convention.
"Regardless of the fact that i was obviously a delegate...no less then six times did white delegates dismissively tell me (to) fetch them a taxi or carry their luggage." Source (http://archive.salon.com/opinion/conason/2003/01/09/bush/)

[Anonymous]

Kipling happens to be one of my favorite poets.


The Young British Soldier

When the 'arf-made recruity goes out to the East
'E acts like a babe an' 'e drinks like a beast,
An' 'e wonders because 'e is frequent deceased
Ere 'e's fit for to serve as a soldier.
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
Serve, serve, serve as a soldier,
So-oldier OF the Queen!

Now all you recruities what's drafted to-day,
You shut up your rag-box an' 'ark to my lay,
An' I'll sing you a soldier as far as I may:
A soldier what's fit for a soldier.
Fit, fit, fit for a soldier . . .

First mind you steer clear o' the grog-sellers' huts,
For they sell you Fixed Bay'nets that rots out your guts --
Ay, drink that 'ud eat the live steel from your butts --
An' it's bad for the young British soldier.
Bad, bad, bad for the soldier . . .

When the cholera comes -- as it will past a doubt --
Keep out of the wet and don't go on the shout,
For the sickness gets in as the liquor dies out,
An' it crumples the young British soldier.
Crum-, crum-, crumples the soldier . . .

But the worst o' your foes is the sun over'ead:
You must wear your 'elmet for all that is said:
If 'e finds you uncovered 'e'll knock you down dead,
An' you'll die like a fool of a soldier.
Fool, fool, fool of a soldier . . .

If you're cast for fatigue by a sergeant unkind,
Don't grouse like a woman nor crack on nor blind;
Be handy and civil, and then you will find
That it's beer for the young British soldier.
Beer, beer, beer for the soldier . . .

Now, if you must marry, take care she is old --
A troop-sergeant's widow's the nicest I'm told,
For beauty won't help if your rations is cold,
Nor love ain't enough for a soldier.
'Nough, 'nough, 'nough for a soldier . . .

If the wife should go wrong with a comrade, be loath
To shoot when you catch 'em -- you'll swing, on my oath! --
Make 'im take 'er and keep 'er: that's Hell for them both,
An' you're shut o' the curse of a soldier.
Curse, curse, curse of a soldier . . .

When first under fire an' you're wishful to duck,
Don't look nor take 'eed at the man that is struck,
Be thankful you're livin', and trust to your luck
And march to your front like a soldier.
Front, front, front like a soldier . . .

When 'arf of your bullets fly wide in the ditch,
Don't call your Martini a cross-eyed old *****;
She's human as you are -- you treat her as sich,
An' she'll fight for the young British soldier.
Fight, fight, fight for the soldier . . .

When shakin' their bustles like ladies so fine,
The guns o' the enemy wheel into line,
Shoot low at the limbers an' don't mind the shine,
For noise never startles the soldier.
Start-, start-, startles the soldier . . .

If your officer's dead and the sergeants look white,
Remember it's ruin to run from a fight:
So take open order, lie down, and sit tight,
And wait for supports like a soldier.
Wait, wait, wait like a soldier . . .

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
So-oldier of the Queen!



(Edited by Dark Capitalist at 8:31 am on Feb. 3, 2003)

[Eastside Revolt]

Quote: from abstractmentality on 10:28 pm on Feb. 2, 2003
in a reply to the stormin norman quote of Umoja about republicans, i will quote Shannon Reeves, Californias GOP party secretary in an email to state republican board members:
"Black republicans are expeted to provide window dressing and cover to prove that this is not a racist party, yet our own leadership continues to act otherwise.
"When i travel to speak at republican conferences and events around the country, wandering through hotels, conventions centesr and social clubs, as i approach the rooms where im scheduled to speak, ai am often told by republicans that i must be in the wrong place....
"As a bush delegate at the 2000 convention in philadelphia, i proudly wore my delegate's badge and (republican national committee) lapel pin at i worked the convention.
"Regardless of the fact that i was obviously a delegate...no less then six times did white delegates dismissively tell me (to) fetch them a taxi or carry their luggage." Source (http://archive.salon.com/opinion/conason/2003/01/09/bush/)



Kill the house-niggas

[Stormin Norman]

Nice of you to commemorate yourself here, Redcanada. You only make my work easier.

[canikickit]

Quote: from Stormin Norman on 1:28 am on Feb. 3, 2003
Nice of you to commemorate yourself here, Redcanada. You only make my work easier.

Does anyone actually take this guy seriously anymore?

[Anonymous]

I do.

[sin miedo]

Too many big-macs to the brain.

[suffianr]

I suggest, if attitudes like Rastafari's continue to gain momentum, we will in fact enter into another Dark Age.

Are we talking about a fall of civilization? What makes you think we're not already heading that way, with all your talk of "failed world governments" and terrorism and the decay of society?

War, war, war!

That's not a symptom of another Dark Age, is it?

If you think material advancement is the only significant measure of humanity's progress, then you are as ignorant as those you choose to condemn...

[Stormin Norman]

If you think material advancement is the only significant measure of humanity's progress, then you are as ignorant as those you choose to condemn...

Is that what I said? No, it was not. I do, however, stress the importance of knowledge and news ideas, for these are the things that carried us into the enlightenment. Material goods are purely a bi-product of that science. The characteristic that I find to be most troubling about communists, like yourself, is your hatred of modernity. I propose this fanaticism of yours is shared with the Islamic fundamentalists.

[Smoking Frog II]

The problem of modernisation is it stands primarily as capitalism and corporationism, The world revolves around making money, whereas it never used to. In Britain there are fireman strikes, because modernisation equals cuts. Some money that should perhaps go to those who work under council services: [eg firement, teachers etc] goes to corporate estaßlishments.

Also, mordernisation may be the way to enlightenment, however, polluting the world and destroying the ozomne layer is not.

[suffianr]

The characteristic that I find to be most troubling about communists, like yourself, is your hatred of modernity.

Ah, touche!

But I don't hate modernity! No, no, you're dead wrong about that one, mate...No, no, I love broadband, polyphonic ringtones, Steptronic gears and Cray computers as much as any other cyber-geek wanking off at the latest edition of Tech TV, but hey, don't you think it's all rather superficial?

If the communist civilization in Soviet Russia was anything to go by, leftist doctrine encourages technological endeavours, exploiting science and physics for more than just the arms race...read about the space programmes, the engineering facilities, the agricultural research...New ideas are always good, but need to be scrutinized and studied before successful application, that's all...

No, I don't hate the future. I've embraced it. :)

You should listen to some of the stuff I listen to, techstep drum n bass, a musical strain of beats centered upon exploiting the darker, sleeker sounds of drum n bass, exploring new rhythms and textures uncommon to mainstream music...Beeps and squeeks, offbeat drum tempos and awkward time signatures, if that's not futuristic, I don't know what is...

I don't really watch TV anymore, I use the Internet for the latest in news, entertainment, music...I make full use of technology in my work; my CV isn't printed and bound in leather, it's going to be available online soon...

No, we don't hate technology. We hate how it is being held from us...Market forces dictate the release of new microchip processors and hardware, software retail and distribution is more about tapping into rich markets than making new applications available to more people and New Age appliances are getting more expensive by the day...Is that what embracing the future is all about? Is there going to be a queue, just like lining up for bread and sausages in old Moscow? Do we have to be of a particular income bracket to use and enjoy the fruits of modern labour?

Material goods are purely a bi-product of that science.

Ever read Jurassic Park? Read the introduction, the part about the latest trends of the financial aspects of biotechnology. Read about how professors are more interested in tying up with biotech firms to patent their ideas than forwarding the resources of their own faculties. Read it. Read it all.

New Technology is a means, never an end. Using it for your own good, and the good of others is what appeals to me. Making it your whore and selling it at ridiculous prices to higher market segments isn't.

[Stormin Norman]

"If U$A attacks iraq, i hope that the iraqs soldiers kill so many fucking american soldiers they can." - Alexander Norby

Yeah, and I hope you end up as collateral damage, you worthless pile of dung.

[Stormin Norman]

"This imminent war might change the world as we know it." - Ravengod

Ya think.



(Edited by Stormin Norman at 10:36 pm on Feb. 6, 2003)

[Stormin Norman]

"Teh American way: If in doubt, kill." - Apocalypse When

Yeah! Hey, I never realalized it before, but all the foreign aid and our benevolent acts are a front for our murderous nature. Get real!

[Invader Zim]

Yes Norman that is a fair point most americans and poloticions who give to charity probebly dont do it as a front to hide their evil nature, however it is an undisputable fact that america causes more suffering world wide than it solves. From war to just exploitation in the third world

[James]

#Moderation Mode



Moved here (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=17&topic=2159)