| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"Anticorporation" |
| Date: |
30 Nov 2004 11:21:47 PM |
| Object: |
1st amendement v Free Speech |
I will make this as brief as possible, most of the right confront any
publicity that shows American soldiers in a bad way as being consistent with
being 'propaganda' that will be used to toughen the enemies will.
How do you see this? The Fallujah thing was a good example, as well as
the Abu Gahrib thing. They argue that by showing such things it undermines
'our' efforts as a nation. and, this is true to a certain extent. The
problem becomes how do you weigh 'national security' against the
Constitution, anyone have any good arguements either way?
.
|
|
| User: "Anticorporation" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
05 Dec 2004 11:13:51 PM |
|
|
Wow, got an interesting update here. I am watching some movie called
'People you will see in heaven or something', and, in the scene I just saw,
a soldier just blew out the brains of an evil jap soldier, they showed it,
the head, the blood the wound etc.....
Now, why did the news corps blackout the headshot in falluja, see we can
handle it, even for entertainment purposes, why can't we be entertained by
the news? I wonder if any censors or anything fretted over this, i wonder
if they think people like me are out here and questioning their every move
and the implications it has on society, the law, and our feeble existence?
"Anticorporation" <anticorporation@absurdity.com> wrote in message
news:Lxcrd.908$nP1.862@twister.socal.rr.com...
I will make this as brief as possible, most of the right confront any
publicity that shows American soldiers in a bad way as being consistent
with being 'propaganda' that will be used to toughen the enemies will.
How do you see this? The Fallujah thing was a good example, as well as
the Abu Gahrib thing. They argue that by showing such things it
undermines 'our' efforts as a nation. and, this is true to a certain
extent. The problem becomes how do you weigh 'national security' against
the Constitution, anyone have any good arguements either way?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Publius" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
01 Dec 2004 01:05:41 AM |
|
|
"Anticorporation" <anticorporation@absurdity.com> wrote in
news:Lxcrd.908$nP1.862@twister.socal.rr.com:
I will make this as brief as possible, most of the right confront
any
publicity that shows American soldiers in a bad way as being
consistent with being 'propaganda' that will be used to toughen the
enemies will.
How do you see this? The Fallujah thing was a good example, as well
as
the Abu Gahrib thing. They argue that by showing such things it
undermines 'our' efforts as a nation. and, this is true to a certain
extent. The problem becomes how do you weigh 'national security'
against the Constitution, anyone have any good arguements either way?
The problem becomes simpler when you realize the war in Iraq raises no
issues of national security. The nation's survival, or even well-being, is
not and has never been at the slightest risk from any threat in Iraq. So the
question is only, "Can the Constitution sometimes be ignored in order to
improve the chances for success of overseas military adventures?"
Mills's answer to that question probably can't be improved upon.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Anticorporation" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
01 Dec 2004 09:49:45 AM |
|
|
"Publius" <m.publius@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:93erd.425223$wV.154961@attbi_s54...
"Anticorporation" <anticorporation@absurdity.com> wrote in
news:Lxcrd.908$nP1.862@twister.socal.rr.com:
I will make this as brief as possible, most of the right confront
any
publicity that shows American soldiers in a bad way as being
consistent with being 'propaganda' that will be used to toughen the
enemies will.
How do you see this? The Fallujah thing was a good example, as well
as
the Abu Gahrib thing. They argue that by showing such things it
undermines 'our' efforts as a nation. and, this is true to a certain
extent. The problem becomes how do you weigh 'national security'
against the Constitution, anyone have any good arguements either way?
The problem becomes simpler when you realize the war in Iraq raises no
issues of national security. The nation's survival, or even well-being, is
not and has never been at the slightest risk from any threat in Iraq. So
the
question is only, "Can the Constitution sometimes be ignored in order to
improve the chances for success of overseas military adventures?"
Mills's answer to that question probably can't be improved upon.
Now that we are in Iraq the troops represent 'national security
interests'. Sort of like the argument against Jane Fonda when she actually
sat in a NVA anti-aircraft weapon. I am not trying to justify the war, we
are past that point, I am dealing with the current situation and how it
affects the lives of American servicemen.
Of course it can be argued that if they were not there, they would not be
in danger, however, I am trying to enlist arguements that are for or against
issues of 'freedom of the press' when it is in direct conflict with
'national security objectives', which do you think should take precedence
and why?
For instance, if we were in a 'just war', can you imagine if Iwa Jima had
been televised and the THOUSANDS of dead Marines piling-up was brought into
your living room, would this have made you call for the use of nuclear
weapons much sooner? In essence, I am attempting to explore the power of
the media (propaganda) and how it can be used to sway public opinion one way
or another.
When it came to Pearl Harbour or the corporate towers, every body was
counted, the explosions shown again and again, this had an impact on the
American psych and did in fact 'motivate' Americans to seek revenge through
violent methods.
Imagine if the destruction of the corporate towers had not been televised
because it was deemed 'obscene'? How could they 'justify' going to Iraq?
Publis writes- "So the
question is only, "Can the Constitution sometimes be ignored in order to
improve the chances for success of overseas military adventures?""
This encompasses the administrations argument that it is better to fight
the enemy on their own soil rather than in our own streets. And yes, I do
not think millions of terrorists were going to get on boats and planes and
invade the US. But, the argument was that if we did not go after them, they
would sneak in and cause havoc here, albeit on a smaller scale like taking
out a nuclear reactor or un-leashing a dreadful virus.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Anticorporation" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
02 Dec 2004 11:04:32 AM |
|
|
"Anticorporation" <anticorporation@absurdity.com> wrote in message
news:Lxcrd.908$nP1.862@twister.socal.rr.com...
I will make this as brief as possible, most of the right confront any
publicity that shows American soldiers in a bad way as being consistent
with being 'propaganda' that will be used to toughen the enemies will.
How do you see this? The Fallujah thing was a good example, as well as
the Abu Gahrib thing. They argue that by showing such things it
undermines 'our' efforts as a nation. and, this is true to a certain
extent. The problem becomes how do you weigh 'national security' against
the Constitution, anyone have any good arguements either way?
Well, I see that the Federalist Papers have come up, so, I would like to
add to my original 'problem' by quoting them:
"I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the
extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the
proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain
various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would
afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare
that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for
instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be
restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I
will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but
it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible
pretense for claiming that power. "
I was all set to use this to DESTROY anyone who thought that 'national
security' over-rides the 'freedom of the press'. This from :
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed84.htm
If anyone cares or wants to debate it. I hope you can see from the above
how PERVERTED our system of govt. has become.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
01 Dec 2004 07:10:34 AM |
|
|
There are so many contradictions nested inside
so many hypocrisies nested inside of so many
lies nested inside of so many crazy theories
nested inside so many dubious at best
assumptions when AwOL Bush says "introduce
democracy to Iraq" a rational person doesn't
even know where to start.
It is a great tragedy, especially the way it has
reduced the U. S. to just another decadent
western power and, even worse, there is a
danger Mad Max Cheney really will get us all
blown up, but even so I cannot help but to
chuckle every time Bush says, "some people
don't believe Iraq can become democratic . . ."
I'm thinking, "yea, ***** Cheney for one."
Ever notice how Cheney has avoided the
issue? It's because every exec. at Halliburton
knows its complete nonsense. Even a liar like
Cheney cannot get those words out of his
mouth with a straight face.
It's a cash cow for Halliburton, at least until the
Democrats decide to run someone for
president.
Bret Cahill
"Anticorporation" in
Message-id: <Lxcrd.908$nP1.862@twister.socal.rr.com> writes:
I will make this as brief as possible, most of the right confront any
publicity that shows American soldiers in a bad way as being consistent with
being 'propaganda' that will be used to toughen the enemies will.
How do you see this? The Fallujah thing was a good example, as well as
the Abu Gahrib thing. They argue that by showing such things it undermines
'our' efforts as a nation. and, this is true to a certain extent. The
problem becomes how do you weigh 'national security' against the
Constitution, anyone have any good arguements either way?
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "shrikeback" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
01 Dec 2004 10:39:24 AM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote :
Ever notice how Cheney has avoided the
issue? It's because every exec. at Halliburton
knows its complete nonsense. Even a liar like
Cheney cannot get those words out of his
mouth with a straight face.
It's a cash cow for Halliburton, at least until the
Democrats decide to run someone for
president.
Dude. Accusations of "liar, liar, pants on fire" don't
carry much weight when they come from someone
who has proven they don't mind lying. 100K dead
Iraqi civilians, my *****!
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
01 Dec 2004 03:58:15 PM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <BJudnZCp3q6rbjDcRVn-iQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote :
Ever notice how Cheney has avoided the
issue? It's because every exec. at Halliburton
knows its complete nonsense. Even a liar like
Cheney cannot get those words out of his
mouth with a straight face.
It's a cash cow for Halliburton, at least until the
Democrats decide to run someone for
president.
Dude. Accusations of "liar, liar, pants on fire" don't
carry much weight
If you think Cheney honest then you should,
even more than me, wonder why Cheney
cannot get these words out of his mouth:
"We're introducing democracy to Iraq."
With a straight face.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "shrikeback" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
01 Dec 2004 11:24:36 PM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041201165815.12272.00001674@mb-m28.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <BJudnZCp3q6rbjDcRVn-iQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote :
Ever notice how Cheney has avoided the
issue? It's because every exec. at Halliburton
knows its complete nonsense. Even a liar like
Cheney cannot get those words out of his
mouth with a straight face.
It's a cash cow for Halliburton, at least until the
Democrats decide to run someone for
president.
Dude. Accusations of "liar, liar, pants on fire" don't
carry much weight
If you think Cheney honest then you should,
even more than me, wonder why Cheney
cannot get these words out of his mouth:
"We're introducing democracy to Iraq."
With a straight face.
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy? Same thing you say now
about your 100K dead civilian made up statistic:
nothing. Just dodge and dodge and dodge and
dodge.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
02 Dec 2004 07:19:51 AM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <94KdnVNdDZI4OzPcRVn-rA@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041201165815.12272.00001674@mb-m28.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <BJudnZCp3q6rbjDcRVn-iQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote :
Ever notice how Cheney has avoided the
issue? It's because every exec. at Halliburton
knows its complete nonsense. Even a liar like
Cheney cannot get those words out of his
mouth with a straight face.
It's a cash cow for Halliburton, at least until the
Democrats decide to run someone for
president.
Dude. Accusations of "liar, liar, pants on fire" don't
carry much weight
If you think Cheney honest then you should,
even more than me, wonder why Cheney
cannot get these words out of his mouth:
"We're introducing democracy to Iraq."
With a straight face.
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
I'll be long dead before that happens.
In fact, by the way Halliburton is killing Iraqis
at a rate many times faster than Saddam, all
the Iraqis will be exterminated before that
happens.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "shrikeback" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
02 Dec 2004 10:51:32 AM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081951.00325.00001468@mb-m17.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <94KdnVNdDZI4OzPcRVn-rA@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041201165815.12272.00001674@mb-m28.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <BJudnZCp3q6rbjDcRVn-iQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote :
Ever notice how Cheney has avoided the
issue? It's because every exec. at Halliburton
knows its complete nonsense. Even a liar like
Cheney cannot get those words out of his
mouth with a straight face.
It's a cash cow for Halliburton, at least until the
Democrats decide to run someone for
president.
Dude. Accusations of "liar, liar, pants on fire" don't
carry much weight
If you think Cheney honest then you should,
even more than me, wonder why Cheney
cannot get these words out of his mouth:
"We're introducing democracy to Iraq."
With a straight face.
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
I'll be long dead before that happens.
Yes, and Bob Graham won the 2004 Presidential
election. As I have pointed out, your prophetic
abilities are less than perfect. Maybe the prions
are too thick and they're interfering with your
receiver.
In fact, by the way Halliburton is killing Iraqis
at a rate many times faster than Saddam, all
the Iraqis will be exterminated before that
happens.
You're nuts.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
03 Dec 2004 07:48:23 AM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <jNWdnf4a8I_C2jLcRVn-sA@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081951.00325.00001468@mb-m17.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <94KdnVNdDZI4OzPcRVn-rA@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041201165815.12272.00001674@mb-m28.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <BJudnZCp3q6rbjDcRVn-iQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote :
Ever notice how Cheney has avoided the
issue? It's because every exec. at Halliburton
knows its complete nonsense. Even a liar like
Cheney cannot get those words out of his
mouth with a straight face.
It's a cash cow for Halliburton, at least until the
Democrats decide to run someone for
president.
Dude. Accusations of "liar, liar, pants on fire" don't
carry much weight
If you think Cheney honest then you should,
even more than me, wonder why Cheney
cannot get these words out of his mouth:
"We're introducing democracy to Iraq."
With a straight face.
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
I'll be long dead before that happens.
Yes, and Bob Graham won the 2004 Presidential
election.
If you exclude all of Halliburton's lies, Graham
was the only one with anything to say.
That's the only democratic way to win if you
want to have competitive elections.
In fact, by the way Halliburton is killing Iraqis
at a rate many times faster than Saddam, all
the Iraqis will be exterminated before that
happens.
Everyone agrees Halliburton has killed 10 times
more Iraqis since the invasion than Saddam
did in the previous decade.
Everyone agrees things are getting worse.
Only a rightard thinks things have improved
for Iraqis under Halliburton. Only a rightard
believes there were WMD. Only a rightard
believes in creationism..
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "shrikeback" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
03 Dec 2004 11:10:30 AM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041203084823.06500.00000916@mb-m22.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <jNWdnf4a8I_C2jLcRVn-sA@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081951.00325.00001468@mb-m17.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <94KdnVNdDZI4OzPcRVn-rA@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041201165815.12272.00001674@mb-m28.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <BJudnZCp3q6rbjDcRVn-iQ@comcast.com> writes:
Yes, and Bob Graham won the 2004 Presidential
election.
If you exclude all of Halliburton's lies, Graham
was the only one with anything to say.
Graham, pioneer in mandatory minimums, Republican
with a human face, has nothing much to say that
anybody listens to.
That's the only democratic way to win if you
want to have competitive elections.
What? Mandatory minimums?
In fact, by the way Halliburton is killing Iraqis
at a rate many times faster than Saddam, all
the Iraqis will be exterminated before that
happens.
Everyone agrees Halliburton has killed 10 times
more Iraqis since the invasion than Saddam
did in the previous decade.
Nobody agrees with that except fundamentalist
fanatics of a particular stripe.
Everyone agrees things are getting worse.
Nobody agrees with that either aside from
fundamentalist fanatics of a particular stripe.
If everyone agreed with that, Kerry would
be president right now. The schools are
running in Iraq, where Saddam kept literacy
at 50%.
Only a rightard thinks things have improved
for Iraqis under Halliburton.
No. Only a Ba'athist believes things haven't
improved.
Only a rightard
believes there were WMD. Only a rightard
believes in creationism..
Well, good. At least we know I'm not one of
those then. Now, drop your McCarthyistic
name-calling, and maybe you'll figger out how
to argue someday.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Referendum On U. S. Troops Staying In Iraq |
04 Dec 2004 10:58:20 AM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <9NCdnVR0ssILAC3cRVn-hQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041203084823.06500.00000916@mb-m22.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <jNWdnf4a8I_C2jLcRVn-sA@comcast.com> writes:
.. . .
In fact, by the way Halliburton is killing Iraqis
at a rate many times faster than Saddam, all
the Iraqis will be exterminated before that
happens.
Everyone agrees Halliburton has killed 10 times
more Iraqis since the invasion than Saddam
did in the previous decade.
Nobody agrees with that
Everyone except the AwOL Bush supporters
who still believe Saddam used WMD against
U. S. troops.
.. . .
Everyone agrees things are getting worse.
Nobody agrees with that
Have you written your congressional delegation
and Bush urging them to support the Iraqis
have a referendum on keeping U. S. troops in
Iraq?
If you haven't, then I'll assume you don't really
believe the Iraqis support the occupation.
You just think posting any nonsense will cause
liberdopia to break out.
Bret Cahill
"Every society has a right to fix the fundamental principles of its
association, and to say to all individuals, that if they contemplate
pursuits beyond the limits of these principles and involving dangers
which the society chooses to avoid, they must go somewhere else for
their exercise; that we want no citizens, and still less ephemeral and
pseudo-citizens, on such terms. We may exclude them from our territory,
as we do persons infected with disease."
--Thomas Jefferson to William H. Crawford, 1816. ME 15:28
.
|
|
|
| User: "shrikeback" |
|
| Title: Re: Referendum On U. S. Troops Staying In Iraq |
04 Dec 2004 01:37:41 PM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041204115820.07924.00001889@mb-m07.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <9NCdnVR0ssILAC3cRVn-hQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041203084823.06500.00000916@mb-m22.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <jNWdnf4a8I_C2jLcRVn-sA@comcast.com> writes:
. . .
In fact, by the way Halliburton is killing Iraqis
at a rate many times faster than Saddam, all
the Iraqis will be exterminated before that
happens.
Everyone agrees Halliburton has killed 10 times
more Iraqis since the invasion than Saddam
did in the previous decade.
Nobody agrees with that
Everyone except the AwOL Bush supporters
who still believe Saddam used WMD against
U. S. troops.
No. Nobody except tin-foil beanie types who
believe they have ESP and that their lawsuit
defending their right to post graffiti on a bulletin
board at the Employment Division has something
to do with free speech or free trade believe it.
And Noam Chomsky, of course.
Everyone agrees things are getting worse.
Nobody agrees with that
Have you written your congressional delegation
and Bush urging them to support the Iraqis
have a referendum on keeping U. S. troops in
Iraq?
That would be up to the elected gummint of Iraq,
wouldn't it?
If you haven't, then I'll assume you don't really
believe the Iraqis support the occupation.
Where do you get that?
You just think posting any nonsense will cause
liberdopia to break out.
Ne znaiu o chem ti govarish.
"Every society has a right to fix the fundamental principles of its
association, and to say to all individuals, that if they contemplate
pursuits beyond the limits of these principles and involving dangers
which the society chooses to avoid, they must go somewhere else for
their exercise; that we want no citizens, and still less ephemeral and
pseudo-citizens, on such terms. We may exclude them from our territory,
as we do persons infected with disease."
--Thomas Jefferson to William H. Crawford, 1816. ME 15:28
Nyet chelovek, nyet problemi.
-Tovarish Stalin
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: Referendum On U. S. Troops Staying In Iraq |
04 Dec 2004 01:53:00 PM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <W4udnVcXb_bQjC_cRVn-oA@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041204115820.07924.00001889@mb-m07.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <9NCdnVR0ssILAC3cRVn-hQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041203084823.06500.00000916@mb-m22.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <jNWdnf4a8I_C2jLcRVn-sA@comcast.com> writes:
. . .
In fact, by the way Halliburton is killing Iraqis
at a rate many times faster than Saddam, all
the Iraqis will be exterminated before that
happens.
Everyone agrees Halliburton has killed 10 times
more Iraqis since the invasion than Saddam
did in the previous decade.
Nobody agrees with that
Everyone except the AwOL Bush supporters
who still believe Saddam used WMD against
U. S. troops.
.. . .
Everyone agrees things are getting worse.
Nobody agrees with that
(Watch the dodging begin.)
Have you written your congressional delegation
and Bush urging them to support the Iraqis
have a referendum on keeping U. S. troops in
Iraq?
That would be up to the elected gummint of Iraq,
wouldn't it?
If you believe liberdopia aka "Halliburton
democracy" has broken out in Iraq why are you
dodging and dodging the question:
Have you written your congressional delegation
and Bush urging them to support the Iraqis
have a referendum on keeping U. S. troops in
Iraq?
If you haven't, then I'll assume you don't really
believe the Iraqis support the occupation.
Where do you get that?
If you really believed Iraqis supported the
occupation, you would be urging Congress and
Halliburton to have a referendum on the
occupation.
If you do nothing except spout off platitudes
and dodge questions, I'll think don't really
believe Iraqis would vote for the occupation.
You just think posting any nonsense will cause
liberdopia to break out.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
02 Dec 2004 07:17:07 AM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <94KdnVNdDZI4OzPcRVn-rA@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041201165815.12272.00001674@mb-m28.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <BJudnZCp3q6rbjDcRVn-iQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote :
Ever notice how Cheney has avoided the
issue? It's because every exec. at Halliburton
knows its complete nonsense. Even a liar like
Cheney cannot get those words out of his
mouth with a straight face.
It's a cash cow for Halliburton, at least until the
Democrats decide to run someone for
president.
Dude. Accusations of "liar, liar, pants on fire" don't
carry much weight
If you think Cheney honest then you should,
even more than me, wonder why Cheney
cannot get these words out of his mouth:
"We're introducing democracy to Iraq."
With a straight face.
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "shrikeback" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
02 Dec 2004 10:47:24 AM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
So, in other words, you will dodge the issue?
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_ and at least the
trains would run on time. Is this why you miss
Saddam so much, he made your ideal gummint
for you. A model for all.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
03 Dec 2004 07:51:26 AM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
.. . .
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
I agree that's typical GOP strategy:
Lie like Goebbels.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "shrikeback" |
|
| Title: Re: 1st amendement v Free Speech |
03 Dec 2004 02:35:09 PM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041203085126.06500.00000917@mb-m22.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
. . .
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out your own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
I agree that's typical GOP strategy:
So you really ARE working for the GOP.
Lie like Goebbels.
Or you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Still Waiting forIraqi Political Literature |
04 Dec 2004 11:24:09 AM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <sZednY9K9MYYUC3cRVn-gQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041203085126.06500.00000917@mb-m22.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
.. . .
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out your own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
I agree that's typical GOP strategy:
Misrepresent and lie like Goebbles.
Anyway you are dodging the issue:
The French and American Revolutions were
preceded by and produced a lot of literature on
government. Jefferson translated _Spirit of
Laws_ from French to English and
DeTocqueville recommended the French read
_The Federalist Papers_.
What political classics have been translated
from English to Arabic and Arabic to English
as a consequence of Halliburton's efforts to
introduce democracy to Iraq?
From what I gather the French and American
Revolutions were more than just just clusterf***
prisoner abuse, aerial bombing of residential
neighborhoods, blowing up Halliburton's oil
pipelines and beheadings.
The French and American efforts at
democratization produced some literature.
Bret Cahill
"The common man in the United States has understood the influence of the
general prosperity on his own happiness, an idea so simple but nevertheless so
little understood by the people. Moreover, he is accustomed to regard that
prosperity as his own work. So he sees the public fortune as his own, and he
works for the good of the state, not only from duty or pride, but, I dare
almost say, from greed."
-- DeTocqueville 1833
We have always known that heedless
self-interest was bad morals; we now know that
it is bad economics.
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt
.
|
|
|
| User: "shrikeback" |
|
| Title: Re: Still Waiting forIraqi Political Literature |
04 Dec 2004 02:02:59 PM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote:
"shrikeback" writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote:
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out your own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
I agree that's typical GOP strategy:
Misrepresent and lie like Goebbles.
Well, it's good to know you agree with yourself.
But the point was, where exactly did _The
Federalist Papers_ confuse you to the point
you believed that Madison thought that
gummint and civil society were one and the
same? Post the passage that confused you
so much. We'll help you. Don't you want
to be the collective to help you out there,
comrade?
Anyway you are dodging the issue:
The French and American Revolutions were
preceded by and produced a lot of literature on
government. Jefferson translated _Spirit of
Laws_ from French to English and
DeTocqueville recommended the French read
_The Federalist Papers_.
What political classics have been translated
from English to Arabic and Arabic to English
as a consequence of Halliburton's efforts to
introduce democracy to Iraq?
What political classics have not been translated
into Arabic? Point one out. Maybe you can
contribute money to the publication of whatever
is missing.
From what I gather the French and American
Revolutions were more than just just clusterf***
prisoner abuse, aerial bombing of residential
neighborhoods, blowing up Halliburton's oil
pipelines and beheadings.
Um. Sorry, but the French Revolution did result
in just a clusterfuck of mass murder and terror,
eventually culminating in Napolean's dicatorship.
LOL. And, eventually, in the Czar burning down
Moscow.
The French and American efforts at
democratization produced some literature.
You think Iraqis are incapable of creating
literature. I see how it is.
"The common man in the United States has understood the influence of the
general prosperity on his own happiness, an idea so simple but
nevertheless so
little understood by the people. Moreover, he is accustomed to regard
that
prosperity as his own work. So he sees the public fortune as his own, and
he
works for the good of the state, not only from duty or pride, but, I dare
almost say, from greed."
-- DeTocqueville 1833
We have always known that heedless
self-interest was bad morals; we now know that
it is bad economics.
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt
"The fuction of goverment is the preservation of property."
-John Locke
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: Still Waiting forIraqi Political Literature |
05 Dec 2004 04:02:57 AM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <CtmdnXU3f5ceii_cRVn-qw@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote:
"shrikeback" writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote:
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out your own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
I agree that's typical GOP strategy:
Misrepresent and lie like Goebbles.
Well, it's good to know you agree with yourself.
That's the definition of being internally
consistent.
Try it and you'll eventually get used to it. It's
MUCH better than disagreeing with yourself
and flip flopping all the time.
But the point was, where exactly did _The
Federalist Papers_ confuse you
The part where you said Madison believed civil
society should force everyone to kneel down
and pray to Jesus.
I couldn't find that one in my copy of the
_Federalist Papers_.
.. . .
Anyway you are dodging the issue:
The French and American Revolutions were
preceded by and produced a lot of literature on
government. Jefferson translated _Spirit of
Laws_ from French to English and
DeTocqueville recommended the French read
_The Federalist Papers_.
What political classics have been translated
from English to Arabic and Arabic to English
as a consequence of Halliburton's efforts to
introduce democracy to Iraq?
What political classics have not been translated
into Arabic?
As a consequence of Halliburton's efforts to
introduce democracy to Iraq?
Ya got me on that one. I don't know.
In fact, that's what I was asking you.
As a consequence of Halliburton's efforts to
introduce democracy to Iraq, what great
political works have been generated?
Point one out.
I can't. That's why I was asking.
I simply haven't heard of any lofty political
classics coming out of Halliburton causing
democracy to break out in Iraq
Maybe you could enlighten us?
.. . .
From what I gather the French and American
Revolutions were more than just just clusterf***
prisoner abuse, aerial bombing of residential
neighborhoods, blowing up Halliburton's oil
pipelines and beheadings.
Um. Sorry, but the French Revolution did result
in just a clusterfuck of mass murder and terror,
Sounds purty awful for a country that produced
what Jefferson called some of the greatest
political scientists of the age.
A place like Iraq which is getting better and
better all the time under Halliburton democracy
must REALLY have some great thinkers.
This brings us back to the issue: these great
Iraqi political scientists are obviously writing
some purty good stuff to avoid 5% of the
population getting killed.
Shouldn't we know the titles of these works?
.. . .
The French and American efforts at
democratization produced some literature.
You think Iraqis are incapable of creating
literature.
Well don't keep us settin' on the edges of our
chairs. We want to read up on the brilliant
political literature being put out by noble Iraqis
who are helping Halliburton democracy to
break out in Iraq.
It must be some good stuff if it can keep Iraq
less bloody than the French Revolution.
Bret Cahill
"The common man in the United States has understood the influence of the
general prosperity on his own happiness, an idea so simple but
nevertheless so
little understood by the people. Moreover, he is accustomed to regard
that
prosperity as his own work. So he sees the public fortune as his own, and
he
works for the good of the state, not only from duty or pride, but, I dare
almost say, from greed."
-- DeTocqueville 1833
We have always known that heedless
self-interest was bad morals; we now know that
it is bad economics.
-- Franklin D. Roosevelt
"The fuction of goverment is the preservation of property."
-John Locke
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Liberdopia ALREADY Breaking Out In Iraq |
04 Dec 2004 11:40:59 AM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
So, in other words, you will dodge the issue?
What issue wasn't answered? You claim that
you believe things are getting better in Iraq.
You claim you believe that low taxes, 35 trillion
dollars in oil wealth and individualist ownership
of guns and explosives are all that's necessary
for libertopia to break out.
Isn't that the Halliburton-liberdope definition of
democracy?
If so, then liberdopia has ALREADY broken out
in Iraq.
We can both finally agree on something.
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
That's the GOP way: Lie like Goebbles.
You guys are so decadent you are giving out
GOP strategy.
Anyway you are dodging the issue: What great
political literature has Halliburton's great
"democratization" effort produced?
And NO, how to bury oil pipelines ain't political
literature any more than creationism is science.
Bret Cahill
"The common man in the United States has understood the influence of the
general prosperity on his own happiness, an idea so simple but nevertheless so
little understood by the people. Moreover, he is accustomed to regard that
prosperity as his own work. So he sees the public fortune as his own, and he
works for the good of the state, not only from duty or pride, but, I dare
almost say, from greed."
-- DeTocqueville 1833
.
|
|
|
| User: "shrikeback" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberdopia ALREADY Breaking Out In Iraq |
04 Dec 2004 02:06:58 PM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041204124059.07924.00001891@mb-m07.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
So, in other words, you will dodge the issue?
What issue wasn't answered?
I asked what you would do when democracy
is already in place in Iraq. You responded with
a bunch of your standardized repetitive
gobbledygook. So I'm assuming you're saying
that you'll dodge that bridge when you come to
it.
You claim that
you believe things are getting better in Iraq.
You claim you believe that low taxes, 35 trillion
dollars in oil wealth and individualist ownership
of guns and explosives are all that's necessary
for libertopia to break out.
Where did I claim that? I suggest cutting back
on the Robitussin.
Isn't that the Halliburton-liberdope definition of
democracy?
If so, then liberdopia has ALREADY broken out
in Iraq.
We can both finally agree on something.
Well, we can agree that you're nuts. All agreed,
say "aye".
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out your own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
That's the GOP way: Lie like Goebbles.
You guys are so decadent you are giving out
GOP strategy.
Anyway you are dodging the issue: What great
political literature has Halliburton's great
"democratization" effort produced?
Your posts maybe. Hahaha.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberdopia ALREADY Breaking Out In Iraq |
05 Dec 2004 04:17:03 AM |
|
|
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <A62dndE5IqDthS_cRVn-oQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041204124059.07924.00001891@mb-m07.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
So, in other words, you will dodge the issue?
What issue wasn't answered?
I asked what you would do when democracy
is already in place in Iraq.
That assumes democracy HASN'T broken out
in Iraq.
Now if we are talking Jeffersonian democracy,
that is taxation w/ representation, free speech
on economic issues, civil society not forcing
everyone to kneel down and pray to Allah,
that's a very good assumption.
But if we are talking about neo con Halliburton
democracy, that is, no taxes, 30 trillion in
oil wealth, no free speech and conservative
religious fundies running all over the place
with individualist ownership of arms, well, then
democracy has ALREADY arrived.
.. . .
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out our own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
That's the GOP way: Lie like Goebbles.
You guys are so decadent you are giving out
GOP strategy.
Anyway you are dodging the issue: What great
political literature has Halliburton's great
"democratization" effort produced?
Something loftier than a Halliburton manual to
keep Iraqis from blowing up pipelines.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azrael Nightwind" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberdopia ALREADY Breaking Out In Iraq |
05 Dec 2004 09:09:03 AM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041205051703.06280.00001139@mb-m26.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <A62dndE5IqDthS_cRVn-oQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041204124059.07924.00001891@mb-m07.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
So, in other words, you will dodge the issue?
What issue wasn't answered?
I asked what you would do when democracy
is already in place in Iraq.
That assumes democracy HASN'T broken out
in Iraq.
Now if we are talking Jeffersonian democracy,
that is taxation w/ representation, free speech
on economic issues, civil society not forcing
everyone to kneel down and pray to Allah,
that's a very good assumption.
But if we are talking about neo con Halliburton
democracy, that is, no taxes, 30 trillion in
oil wealth, no free speech and conservative
religious fundies running all over the place
with individualist ownership of arms, well, then
democracy has ALREADY arrived.
. . .
Az:
As in, not democracy? You seem slightly confused over what democracy is and
isn't. Would you care to check a dictionary?
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out our own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
That's the GOP way: Lie like Goebbles.
You guys are so decadent you are giving out
GOP strategy.
Anyway you are dodging the issue: What great
political literature has Halliburton's great
"democratization" effort produced?
Something loftier than a Halliburton manual to
keep Iraqis from blowing up pipelines.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberdopia ALREADY Breaking Out In Iraq |
05 Dec 2004 01:12:38 PM |
|
|
Political science isn't rocket science but it isn't
trivial either.
Each real citizen needs to read more than a
dictionary definition of "democracy."
Start out with these six and come back when
you are finished:
_The Republic_ by Plato
_Spirit of Laws_ by Montesquieu
_Notes on the State of Virginia_ by Jefferson
_The Federalist Papers_ by Madison, et al
_Democracy In America_ by DeTocqueville
_Picture This_ by Heller
Bret Cahill
"Azrael Nightwind" in
Message-id: <jwFsd.3550$IB6.484@trndny06> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041205051703.06280.00001139@mb-m26.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <A62dndE5IqDthS_cRVn-oQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041204124059.07924.00001891@mb-m07.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
So, in other words, you will dodge the issue?
What issue wasn't answered?
I asked what you would do when democracy
is already in place in Iraq.
That assumes democracy HASN'T broken out
in Iraq.
Now if we are talking Jeffersonian democracy,
that is taxation w/ representation, free speech
on economic issues, civil society not forcing
everyone to kneel down and pray to Allah,
that's a very good assumption.
But if we are talking about neo con Halliburton
democracy, that is, no taxes, 30 trillion in
oil wealth, no free speech and conservative
religious fundies running all over the place
with individualist ownership of arms, well, then
democracy has ALREADY arrived.
. . .
Az:
As in, not democracy? You seem slightly confused over what democracy is and
isn't. Would you care to check a dictionary?
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out our own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
That's the GOP way: Lie like Goebbles.
You guys are so decadent you are giving out
GOP strategy.
Anyway you are dodging the issue: What great
political literature has Halliburton's great
"democratization" effort produced?
Something loftier than a Halliburton manual to
keep Iraqis from blowing up pipelines.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azrael Nightwind" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberdopia ALREADY Breaking Out In Iraq |
05 Dec 2004 10:37:46 PM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041205141238.11818.00001568@mb-m16.aol.com...
Political science isn't rocket science but it isn't
trivial either.
Each real citizen needs to read more than a
dictionary definition of "democracy."
Start out with these six and come back when
you are finished:
_The Republic_ by Plato
_Spirit of Laws_ by Montesquieu
_Notes on the State of Virginia_ by Jefferson
_The Federalist Papers_ by Madison, et al
_Democracy In America_ by DeTocqueville
_Picture This_ by Heller
Bret Cahill
Az:
Read Jefferson, read Plato, read Madison, read Montesquieu. Before this. I
don't remember seeing what you refer to as 'neo con Halliburton democracy'
in any of them. The again, it may just be in the -other books- on your
list?
"Azrael Nightwind" in
Message-id: <jwFsd.3550$IB6.484@trndny06> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041205051703.06280.00001139@mb-m26.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <A62dndE5IqDthS_cRVn-oQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041204124059.07924.00001891@mb-m07.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
So, in other words, you will dodge the issue?
What issue wasn't answered?
I asked what you would do when democracy
is already in place in Iraq.
That assumes democracy HASN'T broken out
in Iraq.
Now if we are talking Jeffersonian democracy,
that is taxation w/ representation, free speech
on economic issues, civil society not forcing
everyone to kneel down and pray to Allah,
that's a very good assumption.
But if we are talking about neo con Halliburton
democracy, that is, no taxes, 30 trillion in
oil wealth, no free speech and conservative
religious fundies running all over the place
with individualist ownership of arms, well, then
democracy has ALREADY arrived.
. . .
Az:
As in, not democracy? You seem slightly confused over what democracy is
and
isn't. Would you care to check a dictionary?
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out our own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
That's the GOP way: Lie like Goebbles.
You guys are so decadent you are giving out
GOP strategy.
Anyway you are dodging the issue: What great
political literature has Halliburton's great
"democratization" effort produced?
Something loftier than a Halliburton manual to
keep Iraqis from blowing up pipelines.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
| User: "BretCahill" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberdopia ALREADY Breaking Out In Iraq |
06 Dec 2004 04:55:47 PM |
|
|
"Azrael Nightwind" in
Message-id: <umRsd.93$Dr4.13@trndny02> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041205141238.11818.00001568@mb-m16.aol.com...
Political science isn't rocket science but it isn't
trivial either.
Each real citizen needs to read more than a
dictionary definition of "democracy."
Start out with these six and come back when
you are finished:
_The Republic_ by Plato
_Spirit of Laws_ by Montesquieu
_Notes on the State of Virginia_ by Jefferson
_The Federalist Papers_ by Madison, et al
_Democracy In America_ by DeTocqueville
_Picture This_ by Heller
Bret Cahill
Az:
Read Jefferson,
Did you get to the part on separation of religion
and government?
read Plato,
Did you get to the part where all the
philosophers were bought off by monied
interests?
read Madison,
Did you get to the part about freedom of
speech?
read Montesquieu.
Did you get to the part about _Esprit General_?
Did you get to the part about despotism?
Did you get to the part about taxation
increasing with freedom?
Did you get to the part where it is always a
mistake for a religion to be founded by a
conquorer?
Before this.
Provide cites to support the answers to the
questions above next time.
I
don't remember seeing what you refer to as 'neo con Halliburton democracy'
in any of them.
They were using other terms, like "despotism".
The again, it may just be in the -other books- on your
list?
You DEFINITELY need to read Joseph Heller.
_Picture This_ will tie it all together in a way all
but the dullest will understand.
In fact, read Heller first, BEFORE you reread
the other material.
Bret Cahill
"Azrael Nightwind" in
Message-id: <jwFsd.3550$IB6.484@trndny06> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041205051703.06280.00001139@mb-m26.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <A62dndE5IqDthS_cRVn-oQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041204124059.07924.00001891@mb-m07.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
So, in other words, you will dodge the issue?
What issue wasn't answered?
I asked what you would do when democracy
is already in place in Iraq.
That assumes democracy HASN'T broken out
in Iraq.
Now if we are talking Jeffersonian democracy,
that is taxation w/ representation, free speech
on economic issues, civil society not forcing
everyone to kneel down and pray to Allah,
that's a very good assumption.
But if we are talking about neo con Halliburton
democracy, that is, no taxes, 30 trillion in
oil wealth, no free speech and conservative
religious fundies running all over the place
with individualist ownership of arms, well, then
democracy has ALREADY arrived.
. . .
Az:
As in, not democracy? You seem slightly confused over what democracy is
and
isn't. Would you care to check a dictionary?
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out our own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
That's the GOP way: Lie like Goebbles.
You guys are so decadent you are giving out
GOP strategy.
Anyway you are dodging the issue: What great
political literature has Halliburton's great
"democratization" effort produced?
Something loftier than a Halliburton manual to
keep Iraqis from blowing up pipelines.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Anticorporation" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberdopia ALREADY Breaking Out In Iraq |
05 Dec 2004 09:07:19 PM |
|
|
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041205141238.11818.00001568@mb-m16.aol.com...
Political science isn't rocket science but it isn't
trivial either.
Each real citizen needs to read more than a
dictionary definition of "democracy."
Start out with these six and come back when
you are finished:
_The Republic_ by Plato
_Spirit of Laws_ by Montesquieu
_Notes on the State of Virginia_ by Jefferson
_The Federalist Papers_ by Madison, et al
_Democracy In America_ by DeTocqueville
_Picture This_ by Heller
Bret Cahill
What about PLAYBOY, everyone says it has "great articles"?
"Azrael Nightwind" in
Message-id: <jwFsd.3550$IB6.484@trndny06> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041205051703.06280.00001139@mb-m26.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <A62dndE5IqDthS_cRVn-oQ@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041204124059.07924.00001891@mb-m07.aol.com...
"shrikeback" in
Message-id: <kbGdnbBwr6_02zLcRVn-jg@comcast.com> writes:
"BretCahill" <bretcahill@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20041202081707.00325.00001467@mb-m17.aol.com...
And what are you going to say when Iraq does
have a democracy?
Iraq ALREADY has "democracy" -- Halliburton
"democracy" -- no taxes, no freedom and no
domestic tranquility
Halliburton "democracy" just has a different
meaning than Jeffersonian democracy:
Kill anyone who gets between Halliburton and
the oil.
So, in other words, you will dodge the issue?
What issue wasn't answered?
I asked what you would do when democracy
is already in place in Iraq.
That assumes democracy HASN'T broken out
in Iraq.
Now if we are talking Jeffersonian democracy,
that is taxation w/ representation, free speech
on economic issues, civil society not forcing
everyone to kneel down and pray to Allah,
that's a very good assumption.
But if we are talking about neo con Halliburton
democracy, that is, no taxes, 30 trillion in
oil wealth, no free speech and conservative
religious fundies running all over the place
with individualist ownership of arms, well, then
democracy has ALREADY arrived.
. . .
Az:
As in, not democracy? You seem slightly confused over what democracy is
and
isn't. Would you care to check a dictionary?
It's not like Halliburton is passing out
translations of _the Federalist Papers_.
Hmm. They could pass out our own mistranslations
of _The Federalist Papers_
That's the GOP way: Lie like Goebbles.
You guys are so decadent you are giving out
GOP strategy.
Anyway you are dodging the issue: What great
political literature has Halliburton's great
"democratization" effort produced?
Something loftier than a Halliburton manual to
keep Iraqis from blowing up pipelines.
Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
All conservatism is based on censorship of
economic information.
-- Bret Cahill
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
