amrica under attack.. some thoughts...

[Chief Rebel Angel]

someone forwarded this to me... the author is obviously american...

"Subject: some thoughts....
>
>
> The media makes us believe things, but let's examine:
>
> KEEP IN MIND: we are told that this involved very complex and GENIUS
> planning.
>
> CLAIM 1: The terrorists lived in the USA for a "LONG TIME" and were
> "TRAINED IN FLORIDA" where they learned how to fly, had US addresses, etc.
>
> ISSUE1:
>
> a) Why would "GENIUS" planners, who are "TRAINED PILOTS" be stupid enough
> to leave a "FLIGHT TRAINING MANUAL" in a car?? Did they learn how to fly a
> jet on the way to the airport?
>
> B) Why was the manual in Arabic? They lived here for years, trained in
> Florida, etc.
>
> CLAIM #2: The terrorists subscribed to a (STRICT INTERPRETATION OF ISLAM)
> where dying for "God" is a guaranteed way to enter heaven. Then they say
> the terrorists were "DRINKING HEAVILY" in a bar.
>
> ISSUE #2:
>
> Drinking Alcohol is a MAJOR crime according to that (STRICT INTERPRETATION
> OF ISLAM) so they couldn't be (STRICT MUSLIMS) if even Muslims.
>
> CLAIM #3: Bin Laden is the "PRIME SUSPECT"
>
> ISSUE #3:
>
> HOW? WHY? just because all the TV channels tell us this guy "DID IT"
> doesn't mean we have to believe it. We NEED an enemy, and that's why they
> tell us it's him, because we don't REALLY know who and America hate him
> already, so it works out. Well, not for me, I wanna know who REALLY did
it.
>
> CLAIM #4: Several phone calls were made (calmly) from the plane,
"HIJACKERS
>
> ARE TAKING OVER", etc.
>
> ISSUE #4:
>
> If I made that call I'd say: "ARABIANS" or "BLACK" or "FOREIGNERS" why
just
> "HIJACKERS" did they look (NORMAL?) to ALL the callers? i.e. WHITE!!!
>
> CLAIM #5: Some "FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS" were behind it.
>
> ISSUE #5:
>
> Are we really going to believe that a government backed this attack? We
are
> the ONLY super power in the world, they know we can wipe out ANY country
> behind this attack? We are giving ourselves an excuse to bomb EVERYONE so
> we get closure.
>
> CLAIM #6: "ARABS LIKE IT"
>
> ISSUE #6:
>
> ARABS' countries will get bombed left and right, they don't like it.
> SOMEONE ELSE will.
>
> CLAIM #7: They found a passport belonging to one of the hijackers from the
> WTC attack.
>
> ISSUE #7:
>
> GIVE ME A BREAK. the fire (over 1600 degrees) melted the steel
> but couldn't burn a passport? and from the over 5000 dead, only THAT
> passport appeared? ALSO, since when does flying from Boston to LA require
a
>
> PASSPORT? surely they had IDs (living in USA for that long, DRIVING,etc)
>
>
>
> P.s.
>
> We saw many interviews with the people who filmed the SECOND plane, we
also
> saw pictures of the FIRST one with the words (GAMMA PRESS) on the film.
WHO
> IS GAMMA PRESS? and why didn't we hear from them? and why were they
> filming the street at 8:45am on TUESDAY?
>
> P.s.s.
>
> This was not mentioned on the news, but a friend pointed this out: The
> first plane hit HIGH floors presumably so the smoke doesn't block the
> second pilot's view thus causing him to miss the target.
>
> P.s.s.s.
>
> INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.... what happened to THAT? we keep HEARING
> about evidence, WHAT is it?"
>

[ViktorPravda]

As far as evidence goes, we will never see it. The FBI has been ridiculed by the fed. Gov't for doctoring evidense in the past, so anything they come up with is crap as far as I am concerned. If they did show the evidence, it will be posthumous. They have no intention of putting him on trial. He has been found guilty by the powers that be.
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? It went out the window with mass media. They can convict before a trial date is set. Hooray for technology eh?

Good post CRA.

[azwethinkweiz]

wow, that really makes you think........ good post

[CPK]

yeah really it does.
really screwed up shit in this world.

[Moskitto]

Agreed this really does make you think

[Nickademus]

Quote: from ViktorPravda on 4:21 pm on Sep. 26, 2001
As far as evidence goes, we will never see it. The FBI has been ridiculed by the fed. Gov't for doctoring evidense in the past, so anything they come up with is crap as far as I am concerned. If they did show the evidence, it will be posthumous. They have no intention of putting him on trial. He has been found guilty by the powers that be.
What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? It went out the window with mass media. They can convict before a trial date is set. Hooray for technology eh?

Good post CRA.

actually in something like 50 years the evidence does become public. btw there are about 3 other threads taht discussed the evidence issues

[Chancho]

I agree with the points made in this email CRA - and they are stated succinctly and sharply. Do you have any idea who the author is?

The US has said that it will release 'evidence' very shortly. On Sept 25, Colin Powell said "I think in the near future we'll be able to put out a paper, a document, that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking him to this attack".

But let's face it - I think we all know what such a document would contain - highly circumstantial evidence such as:

Bin Laden's edicts for Muslims to kill Americans and their allies, civilians and military. Motive yes, proof of involvement? no.

The suspected organiser of the attacks, Mohamed Atta, had ties to the Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Its leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is a close associate of Bin Laden.

Phone conversations intercepted by US and German intelligence agents that indicate al-Qaeda groups knew of the attacks beforehand, with one suspect overheard to say "We've hit the targets". This is a bit more solid.

Bid Laden associates Tawfiq bin Atash and Fahad al-Quso, both suspected of involvement in the bombing of the USS Cole last year, met two of the hijackers in Malaysia in December 1999. So what?

Zacarias Moussaoui, arrested before the attacks, is suspected of being part of another team of hijackers that failed in its objective on Sept 11. French intelligence says he visited Pakistan and Afghanistan. I'd love to know what interrogations of this man would reveal.

[Guest]

I understand that your dogmatic anti-Americanism generates tremendous skepticism about the events of sept. 11. Yet it seems to me that you are making some tremendous logical leaps with your cynical implications. To allude that the US government is scapegoating Arabs in this attack because of geo-political interest and a general distaste for brown people can not be based on ANY sound logic. It is in the best interests of the govt. to discover who it really was that committed this act. Were the govt. to simply strike some muslim nations without evidence and with only the desire to please the public's bloodlust, then it would remain an open invitation for the organization(s) that committed this act to perform a follow up. Believe it or not, even if the general belief of this forum is true, and the US govt. is only interested in the welfare of its "corporate oligarchy", as the stock market showed this week, it would still be in the best interests of the govt. to find the real culprits.
Moreover, assertions that this is to further American geo-political interests is ludicrous, what is there to be found in Afghanistan? I've heard many skeptical leftists say that a strike against Afghanistan is motivated by the desire to build a pipeland from central asia. If anyone noticed Afghanistan is landlocked, a pipeline to advanced refineries would still have to go through Iran, which we dont want. Also your criticism of the media's jingoism is unfounded. The US media has been quite respectable in this affair. Rather than inflame the desire for unjustified violence, the media has done much to subdue the possible violence against arab and moslem americans.
It seems to me that the paradigm for political thought that most of you adhere to has blinded you to the reality of the current situation. There is a believe amongst the contributors of this forum that the US is simply out for the good of its corporations and its geopolitical interests; without corroborating any facts, stories have been twisted on this forum to make it seem so. There is also the general feeling that GW Bush is an ignorant twit, a cowboy that shots from the hip, and so he is simply going to attack moslems; again the paradigm you've created blinds you to the reality that the USA has shown tremendous restraint over the past 2 weeks. Then as I pointed out before the paradigm says the the US media is a propaganda tool, and so with out really seeing or listening to what is being said out there you assume that the networks are clamoring for war. It seems that your institutional anti-americanism blinds you to the point were many here seem to support the Taliban, a regime that is illegitimate, not because the US govt. says so, but because its existance sullies everything that is decent in this world.
Finally I would like to say to those here that are western european, look around outside your window, there are many bad things I'm sure, but were it not for the US there would be nothing. And to those here that are Americans, just remember that this is the only nation in the world were you can say what you say in these forums and get away with it.

[DaNatural]

this is a good story, chancho u mention the phone convo that they intercepted of the 2 members discussing how the target was hit, its easy to say this ad then not play it, similarly to when they talk about how the hijackers were in the cockpit and the pilots were yelling then the hijackers took control of the mic and said there was a bomb and yada yada. why the hell havent they played that yet? all thy do is show the bloody subtitles. the evidence for this case has been extremely pathetic and i also question whynone of the passengers mentioned what nationalities these hijackers were. and also how the hell do they know who overthrew the plane or fought back? its all speculation and the bullshit that they found a passport at the bottom of that rubble is comical. peace

[Chancho]

Quote: from Guest on 6:46 am on Sep. 27, 2001
I understand that your dogmatic anti-Americanism generates tremendous skepticism about the events of sept. 11. Yet it seems to me that you are making some tremendous logical leaps with your cynical implications. To allude that the US government is scapegoating Arabs in this attack because of geo-political interest and a general distaste for brown people can not be based on ANY sound logic. It is in the best interests of the govt. to discover who it really was that committed this act. Were the govt. to simply strike some muslim nations without evidence and with only the desire to please the public's bloodlust, then it would remain an open invitation for the organization(s) that committed this act to perform a follow up. Believe it or not, even if the general belief of this forum is true, and the US govt. is only interested in the welfare of its "corporate oligarchy", as the stock market showed this week, it would still be in the best interests of the govt. to find the real culprits.
Moreover, assertions that this is to further American geo-political interests is ludicrous, what is there to be found in Afghanistan? I've heard many skeptical leftists say that a strike against Afghanistan is motivated by the desire to build a pipeland from central asia. If anyone noticed Afghanistan is landlocked, a pipeline to advanced refineries would still have to go through Iran, which we dont want. Also your criticism of the media's jingoism is unfounded. The US media has been quite respectable in this affair. Rather than inflame the desire for unjustified violence, the media has done much to subdue the possible violence against arab and moslem americans.
It seems to me that the paradigm for political thought that most of you adhere to has blinded you to the reality of the current situation. There is a believe amongst the contributors of this forum that the US is simply out for the good of its corporations and its geopolitical interests; without corroborating any facts, stories have been twisted on this forum to make it seem so. There is also the general feeling that GW Bush is an ignorant twit, a cowboy that shots from the hip, and so he is simply going to attack moslems; again the paradigm you've created blinds you to the reality that the USA has shown tremendous restraint over the past 2 weeks. Then as I pointed out before the paradigm says the the US media is a propaganda tool, and so with out really seeing or listening to what is being said out there you assume that the networks are clamoring for war. It seems that your institutional anti-americanism blinds you to the point were many here seem to support the Taliban, a regime that is illegitimate, not because the US govt. says so, but because its existance sullies everything that is decent in this world.
Finally I would like to say to those here that are western european, look around outside your window, there are many bad things I'm sure, but were it not for the US there would be nothing. And to those here that are Americans, just remember that this is the only nation in the world were you can say what you say in these forums and get away with it.

Well 'guest', the assumptions and gross inaccuracies continue. To be critical and questioning is NOT to condemn all aspects of capitalist 'lifestyle'. To seek information and analyse it is merely the kind of reasonable action that any thinking person would take when faced with a deluge of information, mostly disinformation.

The accusations in your above post are conclusions that YOU have reached about our views - conclusions that we ourselves have not stated and do not adhere to. You obviously have no respect for accuracy.

The circumstantial evidence that I have discussed is the sum total of the 'evidence' presented by the US government thus far. This is totally unsatisfactory to most reasonable people AND most nation states.

Who exactly mentioned that the US had geopolitical interest in Afghanistan? Whether or not this is a factor is something upon which I have no opinion - my point is that you have asserted this as the general consensus of the forum. Gross generalisations based on no evidence.

Your comment that 'the media has been quite respectable in this affair' reveals your profound ignorance of REALITY. There are numerous threads with pertinent links on this topic, I strongly recommend that you educate yourself for your own benefit at least. If that is unsatisfactory, visit any alternative media outlet for information on the mainstream media's disinformation.

If you think that GW is to be credited with any intelligence, then this is the most helpful piece of information you could offer us as to the state of your own.

'Were it not for the US there would be nothing'. This comment is so far beyond reason and knowledge that it simply defies belief.

This is the 'only nation in the world where you can say what you want and get away with it'. You will surely implode under the weight of your ignorance! I am staggered that an individual such as yourself exists and holds these beliefs.

It is so very convenient for you to label all interested inquiry on these forums as 'Anti-Americanism'. I suppose when you are as educationally and intellectually deficient as you evidently are, you need to reduce the shades of grey down to pre-digested simplifications. What a shame that in your profound ignorance you are denying yourself the chance to look at some complexities.

By the way, you could easily have come to this forum and made constructively critical remarks that would have prompted debate. But no, you are merely and obviously an extremely impotent human being who is so evidently deprived of LOVE that it would never occur to you to approach different views with RESPECT. I feel great pity for you - for you are a sad, sorry and no doubt lonely individual with a mind sealed shut by social conditioning.

For a more appropriate forum for you, visit:
iamahatefilledsadisticignoramus.com

[ViktorPravda]

Quote: from Guest on 6:46 am on Sep. 27, 2001
I understand that your dogmatic anti-Americanism generates tremendous skepticism about the events of sept. 11. Yet it seems to me that you are making some tremendous logical leaps with your cynical implications. To allude that the US government is scapegoating Arabs in this attack because of geo-political interest and a general distaste for brown people can not be based on ANY sound logic. It is in the best interests of the govt. to discover who it really was that committed this act. Were the govt. to simply strike some muslim nations without evidence and with only the desire to please the public's bloodlust, then it would remain an open invitation for the organization(s) that committed this act to perform a follow up. Believe it or not, even if the general belief of this forum is true, and the US govt. is only interested in the welfare of its "corporate oligarchy", as the stock market showed this week, it would still be in the best interests of the govt. to find the real culprits.
Moreover, assertions that this is to further American geo-political interests is ludicrous, what is there to be found in Afghanistan? I've heard many skeptical leftists say that a strike against Afghanistan is motivated by the desire to build a pipeland from central asia. If anyone noticed Afghanistan is landlocked, a pipeline to advanced refineries would still have to go through Iran, which we dont want. Also your criticism of the media's jingoism is unfounded. The US media has been quite respectable in this affair. Rather than inflame the desire for unjustified violence, the media has done much to subdue the possible violence against arab and moslem americans.
It seems to me that the paradigm for political thought that most of you adhere to has blinded you to the reality of the current situation. There is a believe amongst the contributors of this forum that the US is simply out for the good of its corporations and its geopolitical interests; without corroborating any facts, stories have been twisted on this forum to make it seem so. There is also the general feeling that GW Bush is an ignorant twit, a cowboy that shots from the hip, and so he is simply going to attack moslems; again the paradigm you've created blinds you to the reality that the USA has shown tremendous restraint over the past 2 weeks. Then as I pointed out before the paradigm says the the US media is a propaganda tool, and so with out really seeing or listening to what is being said out there you assume that the networks are clamoring for war. It seems that your institutional anti-americanism blinds you to the point were many here seem to support the Taliban, a regime that is illegitimate, not because the US govt. says so, but because its existance sullies everything that is decent in this world.
Finally I would like to say to those here that are western european, look around outside your window, there are many bad things I'm sure, but were it not for the US there would be nothing. And to those here that are Americans, just remember that this is the only nation in the world were you can say what you say in these forums and get away with it.

There is plenty of evidence to show that the American government will do what is necessary to further it's own aims. Speaking of AIM here is an example. Leonard Peltier's case has beeen shown to have several fraudulent pieces of "evidence" that were altered by the FBI Crime Lab. New trials have been continuously denied. When the FBI was afraid Clinton would give him a Presidential Pardon they marched on the White House. The Pardon request has well over a half million signatures yet no one bothers to even re-try the man. Look it up.

The FBI Crime Lab has also been under fire for doctoring evidence in other cases.

I am not saying that every part of the government is bad or that America itself is bad. I merely suggest that there are a lot of "bad apples" in the barrel that spoil things for the others.

I am not "Anti-American." I am anti bull****. The problem I have is we get fed too much of it.

As far as the media goes...
Some networks have been handling it well. Others not so well. No problem. Fifteen minutes after the attack I was hearing bin Laden's name being slung around but no other suspects mentioned. Isn't it a bit worrisome that the media machine would have the ability to figure out who did this before our own "intelligence" community did?

One last thing (for now), it is not un-patriotic to have doubts or question. The framers of our gov't had many doubts themselves. They sequestered themselves and their views until the agreed constitutional document was written so that they would appear unified. The Bill of Rights was only added because a group of States would not ratify the Constitution without it. This was because unless it was in writing it was not believed to exist legally. They wanted legal remedy for gov't in case it got too big for it's breeches.

[Nickademus]

Quote: from Guest on 6:46 am on Sep. 27, 2001
I understand that your dogmatic anti-Americanism generates tremendous skepticism about the events of sept. 11. Yet it seems to me that you are making some tremendous logical leaps with your cynical implications.

actually gues we are not make logical leaps. we are actually find logical gaps in the evidence. sorry, as a law student that is exactly what i'm trained to do.

To allude that the US government is scapegoating Arabs in this attack because of geo-political interest and a general distaste for brown people can not be based on ANY sound logic. It is in the best interests of the govt. to discover who it really was that committed this act. Were the govt. to simply strike some muslim nations without evidence and with only the desire to please the public's bloodlust, then it would remain an open invitation for the organization(s) that committed this act to perform a follow up. Believe it or not, even if the general belief of this forum is true,

just what is the general belief on this forum because there seems to be a lot of debate about things. don't generalize our beliefs because we are all very different people on this bb

and the US govt. is only interested in the welfare of its "corporate oligarchy", as the stock market showed this week, it would still be in the best interests of the govt. to find the real culprits.
Moreover, assertions that this is to further American geo-political interests is ludicrous, what is there to be found in Afghanistan? I've heard many skeptical leftists say that a strike against Afghanistan is motivated by the desire to build a pipeland from central asia. If anyone noticed Afghanistan is landlocked, a pipeline to advanced refineries would still have to go through Iran, which we dont want. Also your criticism of the media's jingoism is unfounded. The US media has been quite respectable in this affair. Rather than inflame the desire for unjustified violence, the media has done much to subdue the possible violence against arab and moslem americans.
It seems to me that the paradigm for political thought that most of you adhere to has blinded you to the reality of the current situation. There is a believe amongst the contributors of this forum that the US is simply out for the good of its corporations and its geopolitical interests; without corroborating any facts, stories have been twisted on this forum to make it seem so.

how many times do you have to say that to either convince yourself or to think you are making an intelligent and long winded response

There is also the general feeling that GW Bush is an ignorant twit, a cowboy that shots from the hip, and so he is simply going to attack moslems; again the paradigm you've created blinds you to the reality that the USA has shown tremendous restraint over the past 2 weeks.

i agree that the us has shown more restraint that i expected. however. if you watch gw in different situations it is obvious that he is sometimes controlled by others. he has a lot of screwed up policies. i think he's a twit because of his policies, and not just because he's democratic

Then as I pointed out before the paradigm says the the US media is a propaganda tool, and so with out really seeing or listening to what is being said out there you assume that the networks are clamoring for war. It seems that your institutional anti-americanism blinds you to the point were many here seem to support the Taliban, a regime that is illegitimate, not because the US govt. says so, but because its existance sullies everything that is decent in this world.

actually i don't think any of us here support the taliban. in fact most of us reject the taliban especially because of its religious zealousness and the atrocious human rights problems it causes.

Finally I would like to say to those here that are western european, look around outside your window, there are many bad things I'm sure, but were it not for the US there would be nothing. And to those here that are Americans, just remember that this is the only nation in the world were you can say what you say in these forums and get away with it.

i sure as hell seem to be getting away with it and i don't live in the united states. gee i must be a cia trained person to be able to get away with this huh?

your statement was not thought out well and has a lot of generalizations and assumptions and only made an ass of yourself.

[Guest]

unlike any of you i actually pointed out the generalizations and assumptions that were made by previous contributors to this forum. Next time bring up the points of contention you have with my statement rather than simply making snide comments about certain pieces of it. Furthermore I think the aggressive tone that I've elicited, despite my careful thought not perfect attempt to use objective diction, is proof of efficacy.

[cubist]

guest

a few things i would like to point out just becuse we dislike the the US Government policies Doesn't make us Anti American Just becuase we believe the eveidence to be highly circumstantial doesn't make us anti american i am not anti american i like everybody and anybody and human life is of more value to me than anything else but

america has jumped in guns blasing many times before as have the uk

All Media forms are subject to propaganda as they are written by a person with opinions this site is full of leftist propaganda .

i think Bush is a "twit" as u put hit purely becuase of his policies the event of sept 11th have made no alterations to my opinion i will not support him just becuase some terrorist decided to crash a couple of planes into a building or two

i am not skeptical about the events of sept the 11th as far as im concerned to planes crashed in to the WTC and one into the pentagon IT happens thats what terrorisms about just becuase i dont think bin laden did it doesn't make me skeptical about the events it makes me skeptical about the evidence that is being produced

[Guest]

It's interesting that in my post I made sure to be as diplomatic as possible. I abstained from personal jabs, unlike many of the guest here who come simply for provocation, and I am surprised to see that I've struck such an antagonistic cord with many of you. Funny. I do not think I ever made any sweeping generalizations, I used phrases such as "many contributors" and such, but I must have said something that drove you to wield your rhetorical broad swords. It is very easy to find something you disagree with and attack the messanger as you was recently done. To call me absent of love, etc. I'm simply doing what you said is inherent to human character, to question. Questioning logically the assertions and implications that were made against the US govt. and the media. The problem is that, and now i will be undiplomatic, many of you here adhere to the "devil theory of politics" that if you believe in A, then all those that believe in B must be evil. That if you are of the left, then those of the right simply want to ruin the country, the world, etc. You must realize that intentions are important, and even a man, like GW Bush, who I will agree is not the person I would like to have in charge, has good intentions. No one wants to send the country, or the world to hell in a handbasket. People move to do what they believe is right, this applies to people on the right or the left. So rather than assume that the US is bad, think for a second about all the good things its done. When I say that without the US there would be nothing, I mean nothing to represent either the facist wasteland of the third reich or the equally poor option of a soviet dominated world. I think for all your idealism you'd prefer american hegemony to either option. Furthermore you did not address my assertion that If you are american you should be quite pleased with the US, you simply insulted me.

[Chief Rebel Angel]

Chancho- no i have no idea who wrote this.. my elder sister forwarded to me and i doubt it that shes the author...
continue...

[Chancho]

Guest,

Diplomatic?!!! That's a good one 'guest' - you're as diplomatic as the WTC and Pentagon terrorists.

You abstained from personal jabs? Perhaps, but you made sure to adopt the ugliest, most condescending tone as a means to put us all down in one go. Do you really believe that this approach will win you any respect for you as a person or your views?

You haven't 'struck an antagonistic chord' - You ARE antangonistic! You embody the concept. Then we react, as any self-respecting individual would. Get it right.

No sweeping generalisations? How about this for starters ...
"...many of you here adhere to the "devil theory of politics" that if you believe in A, then all those that believe in B must be evil. That if you are of the left, then those of the right simply want to ruin the country, the world, etc."
What does a person have to say to you to get you to comprehend that we do not subscribe to absolutes? Your attitude is 'MY COUNTRY RIGHT OR WRONG' and you DARE to lecture us about being black and white in our thinking?! laughable!

You are NOT a 'messenger'. You are putting forward your views - which ordinarily would be received with interest - but in such a grossly disrespectful way that your approach negates the force of your actual message. Hence it appears that you are NOT interested in having a discussion but rather, you are only interested in inciting negativity.

You are not 'questioning' - you are ATTACKING. A person interested in genuine inquiry would never employ your disrespectful manner.

You are devoid of love - love for your fellow human being is comprised of RESPECT - you have shown that you have no concept of respect. It is a vicious cycle guest - you reap what you sow - but you come here with your bucollic toxicity and then ask to be 'respected'. What a joke.

GW has good intentions? What would you know about his 'intentions'!? Are you able to perceive his inner thoughts? No, I didn't think so. So that means you must look to his actions like the rest of us. Try to recall his actions as Governor - oh yes, the man really respects life and higher principles!

'rather than assume the US is bad' - another obscene generalisation - which one of us said that? when? where? you are a victim of your own black and white perceptions.

"I think for all your idealism you'd prefer american hegemony to either option." You are telling us what we think now!? Fuck off.

We insulted you?! As I would have suspected, you are an individual who is seemingly incapable of taking responsibility for your own words and actions. Wake up and have some respect for accuracy, even if you are incapable of having respect for other human beings.

(Edited by Chancho at 1:05 am on Sep. 28, 2001)

[Nickademus]

Quote: from Guest on 8:19 pm on Sep. 27, 2001
It's interesting that in my post I made sure to be as diplomatic as possible. I abstained from personal jabs, unlike many of the guest here who come simply for provocation, and I am surprised to see that I've struck such an antagonistic cord with many of you. Funny. I do not think I ever made any sweeping generalizations, I used phrases such as "many contributors" and such, but I must have said something that drove you to wield your rhetorical broad swords. It is very easy to find something you disagree with and attack the messanger as you was recently done. To call me absent of love, etc. I'm simply doing what you said is inherent to human character, to question. Questioning logically the assertions and implications that were made against the US govt. and the media. The problem is that, and now i will be undiplomatic, many of you here adhere to the "devil theory of politics" that if you believe in A, then all those that believe in B must be evil. That if you are of the left, then those of the right simply want to ruin the country, the world, etc. You must realize that intentions are important, and even a man, like GW Bush, who I will agree is not the person I would like to have in charge, has good intentions. No one wants to send the country, or the world to hell in a handbasket. People move to do what they believe is right, this applies to people on the right or the left. So rather than assume that the US is bad, think for a second about all the good things its done. When I say that without the US there would be nothing, I mean nothing to represent either the facist wasteland of the third reich or the equally poor option of a soviet dominated world. I think for all your idealism you'd prefer american hegemony to either option. Furthermore you did not address my assertion that If you are american you should be quite pleased with the US, you simply insulted me.

actually guest i am extremely opened minded and enjoy learning about other people's views. i don't necessarily believe that communism/socialism or the left is right. i believe in it but at this moment it hasn't had a real chance to show itself. one thing i am certain of is that the system we have now isn't work. that is evidenced in the thousands of people who are starving and the hundreds of human rights violations occur everyday. i am here to learn. but i like to use the socratic method to learn which is why i almost always play devil's advocate when something arises which i don't already see the value in.

and just out of curiosity guest, who are you referring to when you said you just insulted me.

i feel that simply because you live in the united states doesn't mean you should think it is great. i have been to and studied the united states. in many ways canada is better. i'm not saying that everything about the united states is aboslutely horrible. but it is not the best possible system. the united states is not utopia.

[Guest]

Thank you Piggie, for proving that at least one member of the board ascribes to the devil theory of politics.
I find it disengenious of you to quote me on a sweeping generalization:
"No sweeping generalisations? How about this for starters ... '...many of you here adhere to the "devil theory of politics' " Without including the whole quote. That was obviously a reference to the part when I said that I would be undiplomatic. I like to give forewarning when I make such accusations, you obviously don't and rather retort with language appropriate to your username-chancho.
In anycase I again fail to see how my response would have elicited such a passionate reaction from you, less you are insecure in what you believe in?
To answer to yet another question I find it somewhat difficult to believe that there isn't enough empirical evidence for the failiure of socialism. If we learned one lesson from the last fifty years its that of the superiority of free enterprise. Yes I do agree that the world is not perfect, but nickademus since you invoked socratic tautology, as put forth by plato, let us move furhter down the philosophical branch to aristotle. In the POLITICS Aristotle speaks of the "mean". In the political sense this constructed a hierarchy of governments:
kingship
aristocracy
polity
democracy
oligarchy
tyranny

bear in mind that this definitions are quite different from what we understand them to be today. Well Aristotle believed that either extreme was either unachievable or undesirable. This is a lesson that should be understood in our day and age, the US government is not ideal but it is not terrible. It is the synthesis of extremes that balance each other out for the "sumum bonum" Yes there are winners and there are losers, but that is the case in any society, what people should look at is that in the US the losers are better off than in most of the world. Furthermore, to pre-empt the assertion that nations like canada, or those in scandanavia are superior in this respect, let us remind ourselves of why. Could it be that because of its tremendous generosity, or because of its tremendous desire to dominate the world, whatever you or I want to call it, the US foots the bill for their defense, if not de jure, than de facto? America is not perfect, no society is intended to be equal, as aristotle said, "justice is equality for equals, and inequality for unequals" think about it. Think about absolute equality of outcome for all and what it would mean to society.

[vox]

Guest writes:

"To answer to yet another question I find it somewhat difficult to believe that there isn't enough empirical evidence for the failiure of socialism."

I don't find it difficult to believe at all, really, and I'll tell you why.

In Nicaragua, what happened after the Sandinistas won a free and fair election? The US did everything she could to destroy the economy. Not to mention the funding of terrorists, right? There is a lot of documentation out there about this. So, if socialism is doomed to failure, why the heavy response by the capitalist state?

In Chile, when Allende was doing some very good things for his country, why did the US support Pinochet? Indeed, why did the CIA try to prevent Allende from being elected in the first place? Again, the capitalist state strikes out against what it now wants us to believe is an ideology doomed to failure. The capitalists seem to take it pretty seriously.

Again, in Indonesia, the US feared the strong PKI, and aided and abetted a genocidal attack. All because of this silly ideology that can't work.

Why?

I think Chomsky has it right when he said that the US fears the threat of a good example. This is, actually, what we know empirically. We have the documentation, some of it available on the Net. We know these things to be true. There is no speculation involved.

However, we're supposed to believe that the mightiest military and economic power trembles because of the threat of a system that doesn't work?

No. Of course not.

The capitalist leaders fear a threat to thier power by a mass-based political system. This is reasonable, predictable, even. Anywhere the threat appears, workers funds are used by the capitalist state to destroy democracy, destroy freedom, and destroy human beings. It's an old story, and one I would think with which most people should be familiar.

vox