Re: The greatest man ever



 Religions > Atheism > Re: The greatest man ever

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 2

1

 

2

 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "Mel"
Date: 03 Jul 2005 09:24:00 PM
Object: Re: The greatest man ever
On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 21:18:32 -0400, "Greg Evans"
<gregIGNOREevans@charter.BLATHER.net> wrote in message
<3irh5uFmmdq3U1@individual.net>:

Elisabeth Müller wrote:

I thought you Americans all had false teeth.

No, what we have is a false *president*.

democracy doesn't work in ANY country.
you have Bush, SA has the ANC, Zim has Zanu-PF, the UK has Blair.
where exactly DOES democracy work????
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
.

User: "Ian Braidwood"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 04 Jul 2005 01:57:19 AM
Mel wrote:

On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 21:18:32 -0400, "Greg Evans"
<gregIGNOREevans@charter.BLATHER.net> wrote in message
<3irh5uFmmdq3U1@individual.net>:

Elisabeth M=FCller wrote:

I thought you Americans all had false teeth.

No, what we have is a false *president*.


democracy doesn't work in ANY country.

you have Bush, SA has the ANC, Zim has Zanu-PF, the UK has Blair.

where exactly DOES democracy work????

It depends on what you mean by work. Did you know that no two
democracies have ever gone to war against each other? I'd count that as
working, if you consider the rest of history; espcially in Europe.
I don't think your equivalence of the ANC and Blair(Why not New Labour,
btw?) with Zanu PF(Why not Mugabe?) is justified. In fact, I think
you've lost your sense of proprotion.
If by work, you mean we live in havens where every individual is valued
as a contributor with valid views, then you're dead right; but then
again even the flawed systems we have in the West are better than
anything else on the planet.
We don't live in a perfect world and if you want better, then you have
to work for it.
(-: Ian :-)
.
User: "Hellbound Alleee"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 04 Jul 2005 02:03:18 AM
"Did you know that no two democracies have ever gone to war against
each other?"
With all due respect, that is the most idiotic statement I have seen in
a long time.
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/demowar.htm
Greek Wars, 5th and 4th Centuries BCE
Punic Wars, 2nd and 3rd Centuries BCE
American Revolution, 1775-1783
American Indian Wars, 1776-1890
French Revolutionary Wars, 1793-1799
Franco-American Naval War, 1797-1799
Anglo-American War, 1812-1815
Franco-Roman War, 1849
American Civil War, 1861-65
Occupation of Veracruz, 1861-62
Spanish-American War, 1898
Anglo-Boer War, 1899-1901
And a shitload during the 20th century, but I trust you get the
picture...
Democracy is mob rule. Period. Anyone who ignores this basic fact is
fooling himself.
Hellbound Alleee
.................................................................
Listen to the Hellbound Alleee Show at http://www.hellboundalleee.com
.................................................................
.
User: "Mos Not@YourHouse"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 04 Jul 2005 09:09:18 AM
"Hellbound Alleee" <afrpennycentury@hotmail.com> wrote in

"Did you know that no two democracies have ever gone to
war against each other?"

With all due respect, that is the most idiotic statement
I have seen in a long time.

Then you are indeed fortunate.
.

User: "Ian Braidwood"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 10:08:17 AM
Hellbound Alleee wrote:

"Did you know that no two democracies have ever gone to war against
each other?"

With all due respect, that is the most idiotic statement I have seen in
a long time.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/demowar.htm

Hello Alleee
This 'idiotic statement' I read in Scientific American sometime in the
early eighties. I cannot provide a reference I'm afraid.
I've skimmed the webpage and if that's the best you can do, then I'm on
safe ground, because an essential part of any true democracy is
universal sufferage, ie: the inclusion of working class women and men.
There is a very simple reason for this dynamic and that is that
soldiers tend to be drawn from the 'lowest' socio-economic groupings,
while those who command them tend to come from 'higher' socio-economic
clases. Once those who raised those who actually have to do the
fighting and have little or nothing to gain from the conflict are
represented, a brake is applied to the callous profiteering exemplified
by the British Empire for instance. Even if the statement about
democracies never warring against each other weren't true, there is
indisputeably a massive reduction in warlike behaviour, however loosely
you define democracy.


Greek Wars, 5th and 4th Centuries BCE...

<SNIP for brevity>

And a shitload during the 20th century, but I trust you get the
picture...

Democracy is mob rule. Period. Anyone who ignores this basic fact is
fooling himself.

What I'd like to ask you - with all due respect - is what makes you so
confident that you rise majestically above this 'mob'? And don't you
think you're being biggoted in characterising ordinary people as a mob,
anyway? (The Great Unwashed is another derogatory term frequently used
by people foolish enough to count themselves 'superior')
As Terry Pratchett pointed out: living in a slum property makes you the
lowest of the low, but owning a whole street of them gets you invited
to the very best social occasions.
Darwinism undermines once and for all the concept that any group of
humans can be 'superior' to any other, because it reveals that the term
superior is meaningless outside of a very restricted context.
Those who have exploited the ordinary woman and man have always had to
erect a facade of superiority to justify their callous disregard for
the vast majority of people who have very similar capacities for
thought and feeling than they do. It is a necessary fantasy for them,
often supported by belief in deities.
Here is your wake up: ordinary people aren't a mob and you shouldn't
characterise them that way. Not because it is unfair, though it is; not
because maintaining a fantasy in place of the truth is willfully
psychotic, though it is; but because it is inaccurate.
Don't get me wrong, I'm well aware of people's faults. However, all the
faults of ordinary people are there in their 'superiors' amplified by
their power. Also, ordinary people are all we have and it is simple
wisdom to make the best of it.
(-: Ian :-)
.
User: "Douglas D. Anderson"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 10:26:30 AM
"Ian Braidwood" <diri.gini@virgin.net> wrote

What I'd like to ask you - with all due respect - is what makes you so
confident that you rise majestically above this 'mob'? And don't you
think you're being biggoted in characterising ordinary people as a mob,
anyway? (The Great Unwashed is another derogatory term frequently used
by people foolish enough to count themselves 'superior')

The notion of " rule by the mob" is carefully explained in "the Federalist
Papers". It is not an assumption of superiority but a critique of human
nature. The scenario is given of an increasingly large number of people
with no leader, all sharing equally with equal power and authority. At
some point there arises such a great diversity of needs and wants, that
the group is no longer coherent, and can not even agree on what should
be brought forward to discuss. The net result is a "mob" which follows
blind emotion rather than any sort of strategic and constructive plan.
The solution of the Federalists was the "federal republic", which allows
for groups of individuals to share a common representative of their own
choosing, groups of such representatives to in turn share a common leader
of their own choice, etc.The Federalist Papers even indulges in speculations
about the ideal numbers of people in such groups, based on historical models
of past and then-present governments which succeeded or failed, analyzing
why they succeeded or failed. Unfortunately the United States has gone
far beyond what the founding fathers believed were manageable and fairly
represented groups. In those days, individual citizens had direct and
neighborly contact with their representatives! Today "Representatives"
assume some sort of prestige and majesty which would alarm the authors
of the constitution.
.


User: "Searclaw"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 03:53:17 AM
Hellbound, no one said that democracy was perfect, but, as Ian pointed
out, it is the best workable solution for the moment, what, by the way,
would be you idea for a better solution, communism? Whilst communism
sounds really nice in theory, it has proved itself time and time again
not to work, look at Russia, whilst the communists, (led by Lenin, and
later Stalin,) almost trebeled the industrial output of a country that,
before the communists came into power, had been a backward farming
nation, they did so with an iron fist, they told the people exactly
what they wanted to hear, (sounds alot like what Hitler did, doesnt
it,) and then when they got power, used it to their own ends, (absolute
power corrupts absolutely,) the constitution of a democratic country,
lets use America for example, (not out of choice, can't stand america
in general, but because it's widely known,) prevents any one person to
take control of a country, or at least make it very difficult to do so,
simply because the government is govened by both the constitution, as
well as courts of law, making it almost impossible for the government
to take control of the country, this same rule applies to each facet.
in short, whilst polititions lie, cheat and steal whilst thay are in
power, at least they arent knocking on my door because i'm writing
this, and torturing me into confessing something i never did. maybe now
you will understand why everyone is fighting for democracy, cos simply
put, it's worth fighting for.
.
User: "Mel"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 12:41:08 PM
On 5 Jul 2005 01:53:17 -0700, "Searclaw" <grant@chagford.com> wrote in
message <1120553597.428621.68710@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>:

Hellbound, no one said that democracy was perfect, but, as Ian pointed
out, it is the best workable solution for the moment, what, by the way,
would be you idea for a better solution, communism?

you have a one track mind. actually, i'm not sure that you have a mind.

Whilst communism
sounds really nice in theory, it has proved itself time and time again
not to work, look at Russia, whilst the communists, (led by Lenin, and
later Stalin,) almost trebeled the industrial output of a country that,
before the communists came into power, had been a backward farming
nation,

agriculture was big in many economies back in the early 20th century.
Russia had a feudal economy.

they did so with an iron fist, they told the people exactly
what they wanted to hear,

naw, they used force on the people.

(sounds alot like what Hitler did, doesnt it,)

naw, hitler didn't use force to subjugate his own people. he persuaded them
to follow him.

and then when they got power, used it to their own ends, (absolute
power corrupts absolutely,)

you are a simpleton. you love cliches and you love stating the bleeding
obvious.
you're not cut out to be a philosopher.

the constitution of a democratic country,
lets use America for example, (not out of choice, can't stand america
in general, but because it's widely known,)

....moron...
i can't believe that you found it necessary to state something as stupid as:
"america is widely known."

prevents any one person to
take control of a country, or at least make it very difficult to do so,
simply because the government is govened by both the constitution, as
well as courts of law, making it almost impossible for the government
to take control of the country, this same rule applies to each facet.
in short, whilst polititions lie, cheat and steal whilst thay are in
power, at least they arent knocking on my door because i'm writing
this, and torturing me into confessing something i never did. maybe now
you will understand why everyone is fighting for democracy, cos simply
put, it's worth fighting for.

you have no idea what you are talking about.
you exhibit the amount of understanding one would get from a primary school
learner.
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
.
User: "Searclaw"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 06 Jul 2005 04:28:06 AM

Once again mel, so many opinions, so little research...

Hellbound, no one said that democracy was perfect, but, as Ian pointed
out, it is the best workable solution for the moment, what, by the way,
would be you idea for a better solution, communism?

you have a one track mind. actually, i'm not sure that you have a mind.

Whilst communism
sounds really nice in theory, it has proved itself time and time again
not to work, look at Russia, whilst the communists, (led by Lenin, and
later Stalin,) almost trebeled the industrial output of a country that,
before the communists came into power, had been a backward farming
nation,

agriculture was big in many economies back in the early 20th century.

Admitadly, no country however had anywhere near the differences >>>between Industry and Agriculture that russia had, when Stalin came to >>>power he initiated a series of five year plans that left the people >>>broken, but pushed russia to become one of the worlds super powers, >>>reasons for initating the plans in the first place are as follows:
(a) By developing heavy industries, Russia hoped that she could first >>>free herself from dependence on capitalist states for machinery and >>>manufactured goods, and finally rival with the industrial production of >>>the United States and Germany.
(b) If Russia was economically strong, she could have the financial >>>resources to produce more powerful armaments that could defend >>>Russia from any possible attacks by the capitalist powers.
(c) Industrialization put all of the national resources under the >>>government and thus enabled the government to impose a stricter hold >>>on the workers.
(d) Finally, Stalin might want to prove that the socialist system, in >>>comparison to the capitalist system, would be more successful in >>>modernizing a nation.

Russia had a feudal economy.

and...?

they did so with an iron fist, they told the people exactly
what they wanted to hear,

naw, they used force on the people.

no, if u really know your history they siezed power from the >>>intermediatry government in a bloody revolution, (just like marx said >>>would happen,) they then slowly made new laws that made it >>>impossible for other parties to exist, btw iron fist means use of force.

(sounds alot like what Hitler did, doesnt it,)

naw, hitler didn't use force to subjugate his own people. he persuaded >>them
to follow him.

neither did lenin, he exploited the poorest of the poor into thinking that >>>he would look after them.

and then when they got power, used it to their own ends, (absolute
power corrupts absolutely,)

you are a simpleton. you love cliches and you love stating the bleeding
obvious.
you're not cut out to be a philosopher.

the constitution of a democratic country,
lets use America for example, (not out of choice, can't stand america
in general, but because it's widely known,)

...moron...
i can't believe that you found it necessary to state something as stupid as:

"america is

widely known."

prevents any one person to
take control of a country, or at least make it very difficult to do so,
simply because the government is govened by both the constitution, as
well as courts of law, making it almost impossible for the government
to take control of the country, this same rule applies to each facet.
in short, whilst polititions lie, cheat and steal whilst thay are in
power, at least they arent knocking on my door because i'm writing
this, and torturing me into confessing something i never did. maybe now
you will understand why everyone is fighting for democracy, cos simply
put, it's worth fighting for.

you have no idea what you are talking about.

go read some history texts, that is exactly what the aim of the >>>"modern" american government system.

you exhibit the amount of understanding one would get from a primary >>school
learner.

.
User: "Mel"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 06 Jul 2005 08:59:43 AM
i have to admit, i've never seen worse quoting before.
if you actually added anything, i can't see it.
maybe yer just too st00pid to use Usenet?
no, you don't need to reply. it simply isn't worth it. you haven't got
anything interesting to say.
On 6 Jul 2005 02:28:06 -0700, "Searclaw" <grant@chagford.com> wrote in
message <1120642086.864014.206360@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:

Once again mel, so many opinions, so little research...

Hellbound, no one said that democracy was perfect, but, as Ian pointed
out, it is the best workable solution for the moment, what, by the way,
would be you idea for a better solution, communism?

you have a one track mind. actually, i'm not sure that you have a mind.

Whilst communism
sounds really nice in theory, it has proved itself time and time again
not to work, look at Russia, whilst the communists, (led by Lenin, and
later Stalin,) almost trebeled the industrial output of a country that,
before the communists came into power, had been a backward farming
nation,

agriculture was big in many economies back in the early 20th century.

Admitadly, no country however had anywhere near the differences >>>between Industry and Agriculture that russia had, when Stalin came to >>>power he initiated a series of five year plans that left the people >>>broken, but pushed russia to become one of the worlds super powers, >>>reasons for initating the plans in the first place are as follows:
(a) By developing heavy industries, Russia hoped that she could first >>>free herself from dependence on capitalist states for machinery and >>>manufactured goods, and finally rival with the industrial production of >>>the United States and Germany.
(b) If Russia was economically strong, she could have the financial >>>resources to produce more powerful armaments that could defend >>>Russia from any possible attacks by the capitalist powers.
(c) Industrialization put all of the national resources under the >>>government and thus enabled the government to impose a stricter hold >>>on the workers.
(d) Finally, Stalin might want to prove that the socialist system, in >>>comparison to the capitalist system, would be more successful in >>>modernizing a nation.

Russia had a feudal economy.

and...?

they did so with an iron fist, they told the people exactly
what they wanted to hear,


naw, they used force on the people.

no, if u really know your history they siezed power from the >>>intermediatry government in a bloody revolution, (just like marx said >>>would happen,) they then slowly made new laws that made it >>>impossible for other parties to exist, btw iron fist means use of force.

(sounds alot like what Hitler did, doesnt it,)


naw, hitler didn't use force to subjugate his own people. he persuaded >>them
to follow him.

neither did lenin, he exploited the poorest of the poor into thinking that >>>he would look after them.

and then when they got power, used it to their own ends, (absolute
power corrupts absolutely,)


you are a simpleton. you love cliches and you love stating the bleeding
obvious.


you're not cut out to be a philosopher.


the constitution of a democratic country,
lets use America for example, (not out of choice, can't stand america
in general, but because it's widely known,)


...moron...


i can't believe that you found it necessary to state something as stupid as:

"america is

widely known."

prevents any one person to
take control of a country, or at least make it very difficult to do so,
simply because the government is govened by both the constitution, as
well as courts of law, making it almost impossible for the government
to take control of the country, this same rule applies to each facet.
in short, whilst polititions lie, cheat and steal whilst thay are in
power, at least they arent knocking on my door because i'm writing
this, and torturing me into confessing something i never did. maybe now
you will understand why everyone is fighting for democracy, cos simply
put, it's worth fighting for.


you have no idea what you are talking about.

go read some history texts, that is exactly what the aim of the >>>"modern" american government system.

you exhibit the amount of understanding one would get from a primary >>school
learner.

--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
.
User: "Mi MM ke"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 06 Jul 2005 09:12:07 AM
"Mel" <mel@atj.faq.com> wrote in message
news:f5mnc1tnd59i50pphgqv29ih37cthcoh93@4ax.com...

i have to admit, i've never seen worse quoting before.

if you actually added anything, i can't see it.

maybe yer just too st00pid to use Usenet?

no, you don't need to reply. it simply isn't worth it. you haven't got
anything interesting to say.

You try typing with a claw.
--
Cancer SUCKS!!!!!!!
.
User: "Douglas D. Anderson"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 06 Jul 2005 11:16:04 AM
"Mi MM ke" <skellarnospam@gmail.com> wrote

"Mel" <mel@atj.faq.com> wrote in message
news:f5mnc1tnd59i50pphgqv29ih37cthcoh93@4ax.com...

i have to admit, i've never seen worse quoting before.

if you actually added anything, i can't see it.

maybe yer just too st00pid to use Usenet?

no, you don't need to reply. it simply isn't worth it. you haven't got
anything interesting to say.


You try typing with a claw.

At least if it's from Sears it has a lifetime warrantee.
.
User: "Mi MM ke"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 06 Jul 2005 05:19:39 PM
"Douglas D. Anderson" <dda@rr.rochester.com> wrote in message
news:8tTye.10956$0i3.9241@twister.nyroc.rr.com...


"Mi MM ke" <skellarnospam@gmail.com> wrote

"Mel" <mel@atj.faq.com> wrote in message
news:f5mnc1tnd59i50pphgqv29ih37cthcoh93@4ax.com...

i have to admit, i've never seen worse quoting before.

if you actually added anything, i can't see it.

maybe yer just too st00pid to use Usenet?

no, you don't need to reply. it simply isn't worth it. you haven't got
anything interesting to say.


You try typing with a claw.


At least if it's from Sears it has a lifetime warrantee.

Only if it's a Craftsman and judging by his posts he's not.
--
Cancer SUCKS!!!!!!!
.



User: "Searclaw"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 08 Jul 2005 01:34:08 AM
I do apologise people, evolution slautherd it, so now i have to bring
it back to life, my new stuff is spaced apart
Once again mel, so many opinions, so little research...

Hellbound, no one said that democracy was perfect, but, as Ian pointed
out, it is the best workable solution for the moment, what, by the way,
would be you idea for a better solution, communism?

you have a one track mind. actually, i'm not sure that you have a mind.

Whilst communism
sounds really nice in theory, it has proved itself time and time again
not to work, look at Russia, whilst the communists, (led by Lenin, and
later Stalin,) almost trebeled the industrial output of a country that,
before the communists came into power, had been a backward farming
nation,

agriculture was big in many economies back in the early 20th century.

Admitadly, no country however had anywhere near the differences between
Industry and Agriculture that russia had, when Stalin came to power he
initiated a series of five year plans that left the people
broken, but pushed russia to become one of the worlds super powers,
reasons for initating the plans in the first place are as follows:
(a) By developing heavy industries, Russia hoped that she could first
free herself from dependence on capitalist states for machinery and
manufactured goods, and finally rival with the industrial production of
the United States and Germany.
(b) If Russia was economically strong, she could have the financial
resources to produce more powerful armaments that could defend
Russia from any possible attacks by the capitalist powers.
(c) Industrialization put all of the national resources under the
government and thus enabled the government to impose a stricter hold on
the workers.
(d) Finally, Stalin might want to prove that the socialist system, in
comparison to the capitalist system, would be more successful in
modernizing a nation.

Russia had a feudal economy.

and...?

they did so with an iron fist, they told the people exactly
what they wanted to hear,

naw, they used force on the people.

no, if u really know your history they siezed power from the
intermediatry government in a bloody revolution, (just like marx said
would happen,) they then slowly made new laws that made it
impossible for other parties to exist, btw iron fist means use of
force.

(sounds alot like what Hitler did, doesnt it,)

naw, hitler didn't use force to subjugate his own people. he persuaded >>them
to follow him.

neither did lenin, he exploited the poorest of the poor into thinking
that
he would look after them.

and then when they got power, used it to their own ends, (absolute
power corrupts absolutely,)

you are a simpleton. you love cliches and you love stating the bleeding
obvious.
you're not cut out to be a philosopher.

the constitution of a democratic country,
lets use America for example, (not out of choice, can't stand america
in general, but because it's widely known,)

...moron...
i can't believe that you found it necessary to state something as stupid as:

"america is

widely known."

prevents any one person to
take control of a country, or at least make it very difficult to do so,
simply because the government is govened by both the constitution, as
well as courts of law, making it almost impossible for the government
to take control of the country, this same rule applies to each facet.
in short, whilst polititions lie, cheat and steal whilst thay are in
power, at least they arent knocking on my door because i'm writing
this, and torturing me into confessing something i never did. maybe now
you will understand why everyone is fighting for democracy, cos simply
put, it's worth fighting for.

you have no idea what you are talking about.

go read some history texts, that is exactly what the aim of the
"modern" american government system.

you exhibit the amount of understanding one would get from a primary >>school
learner.

.
User: "Mel"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 08 Jul 2005 02:11:40 AM
On 7 Jul 2005 23:34:08 -0700, "Searclaw" <grant@chagford.com> wrote in
message <1120804448.209187.266370@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:

I do apologise people, evolution slautherd it, so now i have to bring
it back to life, my new stuff is spaced apart
Once again mel, so many opinions, so little research...

this is Usenet. no research required. anyone can express their pig ignorant
opinions day in, day out.
nobody gives a ***** what we think about anything anyway.

Hellbound, no one said that democracy was perfect, but, as Ian pointed
out, it is the best workable solution for the moment, what, by the way,
would be you idea for a better solution, communism?

you have a one track mind. actually, i'm not sure that you have a mind.

Whilst communism
sounds really nice in theory, it has proved itself time and time again
not to work, look at Russia, whilst the communists, (led by Lenin, and
later Stalin,) almost trebeled the industrial output of a country that,
before the communists came into power, had been a backward farming
nation,

agriculture was big in many economies back in the early 20th century.

Admitadly, no country however had anywhere near the differences between
Industry and Agriculture that russia had, when Stalin came to power he
initiated a series of five year plans that left the people
broken, but pushed russia to become one of the worlds super powers,
reasons for initating the plans in the first place are as follows:
(a) By developing heavy industries, Russia hoped that she could first
free herself from dependence on capitalist states for machinery and
manufactured goods, and finally rival with the industrial production of
the United States and Germany.

yeah, he had big dreams.

(b) If Russia was economically strong, she could have the financial
resources to produce more powerful armaments that could defend
Russia from any possible attacks by the capitalist powers.
(c) Industrialization put all of the national resources under the
government and thus enabled the government to impose a stricter hold on
the workers.
(d) Finally, Stalin might want to prove that the socialist system, in
comparison to the capitalist system, would be more successful in
modernizing a nation.

it was an experiment in social engineering by the clueless.

Russia had a feudal economy.

and...?

Russia had never know any kind of democracy whatsoever.
the workers were told that they would each get their fair share of the
wealth that the Russian monarchy had.
they were told that the workers owned everything, not the bosses.
they were lied to.

they did so with an iron fist, they told the people exactly
what they wanted to hear,

naw, they used force on the people.

no, if u really know your history they siezed power from the
intermediatry government in a bloody revolution, (just like marx said
would happen,) they then slowly made new laws that made it
impossible for other parties to exist, btw iron fist means use of
force.

they imposed their will from day one. there was never any other kind of
party.
they took what they liked from the peasants and shot all that refused to
co-operate.
they were never concerned with anything but achieving their ends by any
means available to them.
to win WWII, Stalin had to allow commanders the freedom to act as they
wished in the face of the tactical realities of the battlefield.
Hitler didn't do that, btw. that's one reason why Germany was defeated.

go read some history texts, that is exactly what the aim of the
"modern" american government system.

the aim of Bushism is American imperialism. in the absence of Russia as a
superpower to counter balance them, America is becoming an ever more
oppressive world force. China has not set itself up in opposition to the US,
even though they are arguably a super power in their own right.
Ostensibly, the only thing China is concerned about is reacquiring Taiwan.
The most ridiculous course of action is to prevent them from doing so.
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
.






User: "Ĉrchie"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 04 Jul 2005 03:51:27 AM
The curfew had been lifted and the gamblin' wheel shut down, Anyone with
any sense had already left town. Yet Hellbound Alleee was standin' in the
doorway saying:

"Did you know that no two democracies have ever gone to war against
each other?"

With all due respect, that is the most idiotic statement I have seen in
a long time.

That depends entirely on how you define "democracy"
.
User: "Douglas D. Anderson"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 04 Jul 2005 09:39:18 AM
"Ĉrchie" <archive23@pphotmail.com> wrote

The curfew had been lifted and the gamblin' wheel shut down, Anyone with
any sense had already left town. Yet Hellbound Alleee was standin' in the
doorway saying:

"Did you know that no two democracies have ever gone to war against
each other?"

With all due respect, that is the most idiotic statement I have seen in
a long time.


That depends entirely on how you define "democracy"

"Democracy" is precisely what happens at business meetings right up until
the boss walks in the room, and all bickering and shooting of rubber-bands
must cease immediately.
.

User: "Hellbound Alleee"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 04 Jul 2005 04:17:04 AM
Read the page I gave on my previous post. It gives a definition of
democracy, with possible caveats. You have no excuse.
Hellbound Alleee
.................................................................
Listen to the Hellbound Alleee Show at http://www.hellboundalleee.com
.................................................................
.
User: "Ĉrchie"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 04 Jul 2005 05:42:23 AM
The curfew had been lifted and the gamblin' wheel shut down, Anyone with
any sense had already left town. Yet Hellbound Alleee was standin' in the
doorway saying:

Read the page I gave on my previous post. It gives a definition of
democracy, with possible caveats. You have no excuse.


Hellbound Alleee
................................................................
Listen to the Hellbound Alleee Show at http://www.hellboundalleee.com
................................................................

Already read - I have some disagreement with it and I don't need an excuse.
You need to explain why you think you should have some control over me.
You should also stop displaying beer!
Pope Ĉrchie 1st, The Poon Pope, Preacher of the Perpetual Wet
.




User: "Iain"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 06:54:02 AM
Ian Braidwood wrote:

Mel wrote:

On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 21:18:32 -0400, "Greg Evans"
<gregIGNOREevans@charter.BLATHER.net> wrote in message
<3irh5uFmmdq3U1@individual.net>:

Elisabeth M=FCller wrote:

I thought you Americans all had false teeth.

No, what we have is a false *president*.


democracy doesn't work in ANY country.

you have Bush, SA has the ANC, Zim has Zanu-PF, the UK has Blair.

where exactly DOES democracy work????


It depends on what you mean by work. Did you know that no two
democracies have ever gone to war against each other?

Wrong -- U.S.A.\U.K. war of two centuries ago.
~Iain
.
User: "Douglas D. Anderson"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 10:12:32 AM
"Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote
Ian Braidwood wrote:

Mel wrote:

On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 21:18:32 -0400, "Greg Evans"
<gregIGNOREevans@charter.BLATHER.net> wrote in message
<3irh5uFmmdq3U1@individual.net>:

Elisabeth Müller wrote:

I thought you Americans all had false teeth.

No, what we have is a false *president*.


democracy doesn't work in ANY country.

you have Bush, SA has the ANC, Zim has Zanu-PF, the UK has Blair.

where exactly DOES democracy work????


It depends on what you mean by work. Did you know that no two
democracies have ever gone to war against each other?

Wrong -- U.S.A.\U.K. war of two centuries ago.
The U.K. was hardly a democracy, even right up through the so-called
Victorian era, it was an "aristocracy", ruled by landed gentry who would
listen to the arguments of select wealthy commoners and act or decline
to act on those at their leisure. The commons had no real power, and
the only thing which persuaded the Lords otherwise was threat of mob
insurrection. This is not to say England was by all means "evil", in fact
many of the roots of modern democracy are to be found there, rather
that England was too conservative and entrenched to realize it's own
ideas, and it was necessary for the likes of the United States to become
the lab where those insights were to be put into practice.
And it's not a perfect solution, but only fools and Nazi's think a perfect
solution is within easy grasp, too impatient to go through this gradual
evolution in which we humans are participating
.

User: "Mel"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 12:41:14 PM
On 5 Jul 2005 04:54:02 -0700, "Iain" <iain_inkster@hotmail.com> wrote in
message <1120564442.101197.162690@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>:

Ian Braidwood wrote:

Mel wrote:

On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 21:18:32 -0400, "Greg Evans"
<gregIGNOREevans@charter.BLATHER.net> wrote in message
<3irh5uFmmdq3U1@individual.net>:

Elisabeth Müller wrote:

I thought you Americans all had false teeth.

No, what we have is a false *president*.

democracy doesn't work in ANY country.
you have Bush, SA has the ANC, Zim has Zanu-PF, the UK has Blair.
where exactly DOES democracy work????

It depends on what you mean by work. Did you know that no two
democracies have ever gone to war against each other?

Wrong -- U.S.A.\U.K. war of two centuries ago.
~Iain

England is not a democracy. It is a monarchy.
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
.

User: "Ian Braidwood"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 10:11:08 AM
Wrong. The UK did not have universal sufferage and so doesn't count as
a democracy.
(-: Ian :-)
.


User: "Mel"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 04 Jul 2005 07:00:26 AM
On 3 Jul 2005 23:57:19 -0700, "Ian Braidwood" <diri.gini@virgin.net> wrote
in message <1120460239.794392.320290@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:

Mel wrote:

On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 21:18:32 -0400, "Greg Evans"
<gregIGNOREevans@charter.BLATHER.net> wrote in message
<3irh5uFmmdq3U1@individual.net>:

Elisabeth Müller wrote:

I thought you Americans all had false teeth.

No, what we have is a false *president*.

democracy doesn't work in ANY country.
you have Bush, SA has the ANC, Zim has Zanu-PF, the UK has Blair.
where exactly DOES democracy work????

It depends on what you mean by work. Did you know that no two
democracies have ever gone to war against each other? I'd count that as
working, if you consider the rest of history; espcially in Europe.

it's just a matter of time before democracies war against each other.

I don't think your equivalence of the ANC and Blair(Why not New Labour,
btw?) with Zanu PF(Why not Mugabe?) is justified. In fact, I think
you've lost your sense of proprotion.

why Zanu-PF instead of Mugabe? Because Mugabe is not the only problem. The
entire Zanu-PF party is filled with fuckheads. ditto for the ANC.

If by work, you mean we live in havens where every individual is valued
as a contributor with valid views, then you're dead right; but then
again even the flawed systems we have in the West are better than
anything else on the planet.
We don't live in a perfect world and if you want better, then you have
to work for it.
(-: Ian :-)

--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
.
User: "Ian Braidwood"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 10:18:30 AM
Mel wrote:

On 3 Jul 2005 23:57:19 -0700, "Ian Braidwood" <diri.gini@virgin.net> wrote
in message <1120460239.794392.320290@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:

Mel wrote:

On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 21:18:32 -0400, "Greg Evans"
<gregIGNOREevans@charter.BLATHER.net> wrote in message
<3irh5uFmmdq3U1@individual.net>:

Elisabeth M=FCller wrote:

I thought you Americans all had false teeth.

No, what we have is a false *president*.

democracy doesn't work in ANY country.
you have Bush, SA has the ANC, Zim has Zanu-PF, the UK has Blair.
where exactly DOES democracy work????

It depends on what you mean by work. Did you know that no two
democracies have ever gone to war against each other? I'd count that as
working, if you consider the rest of history; espcially in Europe.


it's just a matter of time before democracies war against each other.

Perhaps you're right, nevertheless the amount of war is considerably
reduced between democratic countries and that makes it worth while.

I don't think your equivalence of the ANC and Blair(Why not New Labour,
btw?) with Zanu PF(Why not Mugabe?) is justified. In fact, I think
you've lost your sense of proprotion.


why Zanu-PF instead of Mugabe? Because Mugabe is not the only problem. The
entire Zanu-PF party is filled with fuckheads. ditto for the ANC.

That's your considered opinion is it, fuckheads? Why do you expect to
be taken seriously?
(-: Ian :-)
.
User: "Greg Evans"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 10:22:54 AM
Ian Braidwood wrote:

Mel wrote:

[a bunch of crap]

That's your considered opinion is it, fuckheads? Why do you expect
to
be taken seriously?

He doesn't. He only expects to troll for responses, and appears to be
quite successful at it.
.
User: "Mel"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 12:41:13 PM
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 11:22:54 -0400, "Greg Evans" <misterx@larkbooks.com>
wrote in message <3ivmueFncj4uU1@individual.net>:

He doesn't. He only expects to troll for responses, and appears to be
quite successful at it.

i still get you jumping up and down like a dog. woof woof, greg, woof woof.
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
.


User: "Mel"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 12:41:10 PM
On 5 Jul 2005 08:18:30 -0700, "Ian Braidwood" <diri.gini@virgin.net> wrote
in message <1120576710.657689.254130@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:

Mel wrote:

On 3 Jul 2005 23:57:19 -0700, "Ian Braidwood" <diri.gini@virgin.net> wrote

Mel wrote:

On Sun, 3 Jul 2005 21:18:32 -0400, "Greg Evans"

Elisabeth Müller wrote:

I thought you Americans all had false teeth.

No, what we have is a false *president*.

democracy doesn't work in ANY country.
you have Bush, SA has the ANC, Zim has Zanu-PF, the UK has Blair.
where exactly DOES democracy work????

It depends on what you mean by work. Did you know that no two
democracies have ever gone to war against each other? I'd count that as
working, if you consider the rest of history; espcially in Europe.

it's just a matter of time before democracies war against each other.

Perhaps you're right, nevertheless the amount of war is considerably
reduced between democratic countries and that makes it worth while.

yeah, but war is cool. it's entertaining.
it spawns cool movies and games. the best movies are still made about WWII.
the krauts and japs were the best enemies you could ever have because they
were just do eviiiiil. you need seriously evil baddies to make a good war.
not only were they evil, they were powerful too.
you need both power and evil.
i mean, i'm really evil - i have that part down pat, but i lack power. so
i'm not that interesting. if i had the power to keep the armies of the earth
at bay while inflicting loads of damage on you, i'd be very interesting.

I don't think your equivalence of the ANC and Blair(Why not New Labour,
btw?) with Zanu PF(Why not Mugabe?) is justified. In fact, I think
you've lost your sense of proprotion.

why Zanu-PF instead of Mugabe? Because Mugabe is not the only problem. The
entire Zanu-PF party is filled with fuckheads. ditto for the ANC.

That's your considered opinion is it, fuckheads?

yup. and if you think yer so fucking clever and want to be all smarmy about
it, fuckhead, then you can go to Zim and see for yourself that Zim is led by
fuckheads.

Why do you expect to be taken seriously?

i'd like to give you a smack right in yer smarmy little mouth, fuckhead.
Mugabe apologist.
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
.


User: "Searclaw"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 04:02:48 AM
My dear Mel, so many oppinions, yet so little reearch, why oh why is
the anc a bunch of "fuckheads," the south african economy was going
south (excuse the pun) long before the anc was democratically voted in,
admitadly, they sped it up a bit, but when you have a people that have
been suppressed for over 500 years, that have had inferior educateion,
(dictated by the state,) what do you expect, South Africa is indeed,
slowly but surley coming right again, which is more than i can say for
the previous dictators, which is exactly what they were, they sought to
control the people pf south africa, using any means nesassary, yes i
dont agree with all of the Honerable President Thabo Mbeki's
governments policies, but they are doing their best, and slowly getting
it right. the major problem with this country is people like you mel,
people that are still holding onto the past, hoping and praying for
another white ruler, who will lead the white south africans into
supremecy again, well here is a news flash buddy, thankfully people
like you are few and far between, in general, white south africans are
more than happy to work alongside our black brethren to make this
country a place that we can all be pround of, whilst u sit back and
complain bitterly anout the government, and yet are too lazy to do
anything about it, god bless, hope you have a wonderful day :-)
.
User: "Mel"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 05 Jul 2005 12:41:09 PM
On 5 Jul 2005 02:02:48 -0700, "Searclaw" <grant@chagford.com> wrote in
message <1120554168.788267.129760@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>:

My dear Mel, so many oppinions, yet so little reearch,

this is irony.
yer an idjit.

why oh why is the anc a bunch of "fuckheads,"

you must be living in a different SA to me.

the south african economy was going
south (excuse the pun) long before the anc was democratically voted in,
admitadly, they sped it up a bit, but when you have a people that have
been suppressed for over 500 years, that have had inferior educateion,
(dictated by the state,)

man, you are stupid. the ANC members in government positions mostly all have
tertiary education.

what do you expect, South Africa is indeed,
slowly but surley coming right again, which is more than i can say for
the previous dictators,

SA has never had dictators.

which is exactly what they were, they sought to
control the people pf south africa, using any means nesassary,

if that was true, the TRC would have heard it.
it has never been proved that the guys who went around killing activists had
official sanction.

yes i
dont agree with all of the Honerable President Thabo Mbeki's
governments policies, but they are doing their best, and slowly getting
it right. the major problem with this country is people like you mel,

naw, i can do very little harm.

people that are still holding onto the past, hoping and praying for
another white ruler, who will lead the white south africans into
supremecy again, well here is a news flash buddy, thankfully people
like you are few and far between, in general, white south africans are
more than happy to work alongside our black brethren to make this
country a place that we can all be pround of, whilst u sit back and
complain bitterly anout the government, and yet are too lazy to do
anything about it, god bless, hope you have a wonderful day :-)

you are clueless about me and what i really believe.
....slit yer throat...
--
smash yer modem, reboot, kill yerself
Mel the Defiler
member, ATJ regs
webmaster of atjfaq.com
http://www.atjfaq.com/
.
User: "Searclaw"

Title: Re: The greatest man ever 08 Jul 2005 01:41:18 AM
Mel... Dear old Mel...
Whilst you make a valid point about most of the South African Parliment
having tertiary education, there is a small hole in it, Bantu
Education, put simply, the previous regime did not want our black
brethren to become educated, so whilst the DO have tertiarry education,
it is of inferior quality to that of white south africans that studied
at the same time.
and you are correct, it has never been "officially" proven that the
government sanctioned the killing of activists, but it has never been
"officially" proven that OJ Simpson killed his wife, nor for that
matter has it ever been "officially" proven that michael jackson ever
molested any kids... etc etc etc, add nausium, you get my point, just
cos it's not official doesnt make it untrue
.






  Page 1 of 2

1

 

2

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.3585     pg.2749     pg.2106     pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER