UFOs SIGHTED AS MIDEAST WAR CLOUDS DARKEN

[Dr. Bipolar]

Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.

Want to know what "UFOs" are doing buzzing over Iran, Turkey, and
Russia? And how they may be connected to Bush's rapid naval buildup in
the Persian Gulf region?

I've spent hours trying to get some answers to those questons and have
a real sore ass and aching fingers after working on a long research
piece at my blog. Make me happy and go there and read it. :))~

It may leave you with a very uncomfortable feeling for the Springtime.
We're heading into more trouble than you can shake ten Tom Delays at.

It's all there for you to read and consider...and be shocked to know
how close we are to all hell descending...I kid you not. Hell
descending...

http://hotroastednewz.blogspot.com/

Dr. Bipolar

[JTEM]

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters
lately as the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in
the Persian Gulf region,

"Region."

A lot of that supposed "buid up" is centered on Solalia,
and the recent U.S. attacks on targets there. The rest
of it was the *Long* overdue deployment of U.S. naval
assets to protect the Strait of Hormuz, which didn't take
place until sometime AFTER Iran threatened to blockade
it in response to sanctions.

Another contributor to any supposed "build up" is north
Korea. You don't want to blockade north Korea's ports
(and deal with north Korea's submarines, aircraft and
missiles), but simply stop them from either exporting
weapons technology, or importing oil.

Not that we are blockading north Korea. We should be,
but the criminal thugs who own China would gladly
slaughter hundreds of millions of their own people in a
nuclear war, in order to protect north Korea.

[Docrodile]

Post by JTEM

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters
lately as the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in
the Persian Gulf region,

"Region."
A lot of that supposed "buid up" is centered on Solalia,

There's nothing 'supposed' about increasing one carrier group to two,
adding 2 minesweepers, installing more Patriots...or can't you fucking
count?

Typical of a psychotic -- when confronted with simple direct reality (1 +
1 = 2), he has to subvert it even when there's no rational reason to do
so.

Junior, grow up...

[Woodswun]

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.

Woods

[Docrodile]

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come, and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?
It is the capitalistic aims of the USA and its allies that are stirring
the pot over there, pushing for a confrontation now before Iran has nukes
and is better situated as a major power. That is precisely the reason why
this period is so very dangerous, very risky business for the USA and its
allies. No one can be sure of what Iran will do to retaliate should it be
attacked, or its government, and theocratical backing, be severely
threatened. No one can be sure. The possibilities are many, and nearly all
of them are catastrophic on some level, economically or otherwise.
That region is steaming hot with anger and hatred toward Bush's attack and
occupation -- further added to with the recent new front opened up in
Somalia.
Analysts feel pretty confident Syria will support Iran militarily, and no
one can be sure how this cooperative defense will take shape.
The UFOs, or likely UAV spy drones, have been gathering much detailed
surveillance data for at least two years now...that data is essential in
planning any attack strategy and from what I could research online, the
Bush administration is planning something more than an air attack on nuke
facilities.
The so-called UFOs have been surveilling areas over a wide span of Iran,
not just near the nuke facilities. Before my site was taken down, I ran
across some online info that indicated the US intends to aerially strike
missile batteries all along the Northern Persian Gulf, and go directly
into Tehran, and hit several other cities, as well. When I get the new
blog up, I'll have more on all this...
Docrodile

[Charly the Bastard]

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come, and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be offline
for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the remaining available
reserves, and the profits to the oil companies. The oil itself is deep
underground, safe from radiolocical contamination. When the rad count on the
surface finally does go down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price
that the world has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits
for the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Post by Docrodile
It is the capitalistic aims of the USA and its allies that are stirring
the pot over there, pushing for a confrontation now before Iran has nukes
and is better situated as a major power. That is precisely the reason why
this period is so very dangerous, very risky business for the USA and its
allies. No one can be sure of what Iran will do to retaliate should it be
attacked, or its government, and theocratical backing, be severely
threatened. No one can be sure. The possibilities are many, and nearly all
of them are catastrophic on some level, economically or otherwise.
That region is steaming hot with anger and hatred toward Bush's attack and
occupation -- further added to with the recent new front opened up in
Somalia.
Analysts feel pretty confident Syria will support Iran militarily, and no
one can be sure how this cooperative defense will take shape.

All that will do is put Syria on the target list. Isaah springs to mind here.

Post by Docrodile
The UFOs, or likely UAV spy drones, have been gathering much detailed
surveillance data for at least two years now...that data is essential in
planning any attack strategy and from what I could research online, the
Bush administration is planning something more than an air attack on nuke
facilities.
The so-called UFOs have been surveilling areas over a wide span of Iran,
not just near the nuke facilities. Before my site was taken down, I ran
across some online info that indicated the US intends to aerially strike
missile batteries all along the Northern Persian Gulf, and go directly
into Tehran, and hit several other cities, as well. When I get the new
blog up, I'll have more on all this...
Docrodile

Kharg Island... the majority of Iran's oil goes through the KI terminal. Put
that out of commission and the money flow stops cold. Hit 'em in the wallet.

Charly

[Docrodile]

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come, and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be offline
for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the remaining available
reserves, and the profits to the oil companies. The oil itself is deep
underground, safe from radiolocical contamination. When the rad count on the
surface finally does go down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price
that the world has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits
for the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Nothing much makes sense to me anymore. As I approach the winter of my
life, I see a species whose meaning and purpose I increasingly question.
And a supposed supreme intelligence that must've had a bad day long ago
when he created it.

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile
It is the capitalistic aims of the USA and its allies that are stirring
the pot over there, pushing for a confrontation now before Iran has nukes
and is better situated as a major power. That is precisely the reason why
this period is so very dangerous, very risky business for the USA and its
allies. No one can be sure of what Iran will do to retaliate should it be
attacked, or its government, and theocratical backing, be severely
threatened. No one can be sure. The possibilities are many, and nearly all
of them are catastrophic on some level, economically or otherwise.
That region is steaming hot with anger and hatred toward Bush's attack and
occupation -- further added to with the recent new front opened up in
Somalia.
Analysts feel pretty confident Syria will support Iran militarily, and no
one can be sure how this cooperative defense will take shape.

All that will do is put Syria on the target list. Isaah springs to mind here.

It will, of course, be justification for expanding the war into Syria if
some veteran analysts are correct.

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile
The UFOs, or likely UAV spy drones, have been gathering much detailed
surveillance data for at least two years now...that data is essential in
planning any attack strategy and from what I could research online, the
Bush administration is planning something more than an air attack on nuke
facilities.
The so-called UFOs have been surveilling areas over a wide span of Iran,
not just near the nuke facilities. Before my site was taken down, I ran
across some online info that indicated the US intends to aerially strike
missile batteries all along the Northern Persian Gulf, and go directly
into Tehran, and hit several other cities, as well. When I get the new
blog up, I'll have more on all this...
Docrodile

Kharg Island... the majority of Iran's oil goes through the KI terminal. Put
that out of commission and the money flow stops cold. Hit 'em in the wallet.

Well, Charly, Iran is no powerhouse, no Nazi Germany equivalent or
anywhere near it, nor even up to Mussolini's Italy...they are clearly
vulnerable, but the disruption of oil makes the West vulnerable, too. It
gets down usually with this species, vying for more power and profit as it
always has and does now, that the short-term downfall is sacrificed to
gain the long-term benefits. And I think that is exactly where we stand
right now...on the edge of looking into a deep shorter-term abyss, but the
elitists (that 5% on the planet with the most influence and investment,
etc.) won't be going down with us. They're already looking over the abyss
to the next profit and power margin they'll garner. It's not their
families that'll die. They're heavily fortified, protected, insured in so
many ways. It's not even the billions they'll temporarily lose in the
short-term downfall they've engineered. They have plenty of reserves to
keep them fat and well fed, as usual.
All we can really do is to prepare, as best we can at this level, for a
mighty plunge starting in a matter of weeks...and all the typical media
and political hysteria accompanying it, distracting, redirecting,
misinforming, exploiting...LOL! And let's not leave out the religious
fanatics...and a renewed sense the apocalypse and Jesus's imminent return
has finally come. Oh man...I'm glad I'm finishing up my existence
here...what an insane asylum.
Docrodile

Post by Charly the Bastard
Charly

[JTEM]

Post by Docrodile
Nothing much makes sense to me anymore. As
I approach the winter of my life, I see a species
whose meaning and purpose I increasingly question.
And a supposed supreme intelligence that must've
had a bad day long ago when he created it.

Oh, someone needs a ::Hug::

Think of kittens & little bunnies. Little fury bunnies. Fluffy
wuffy wittle bunnies -- woo, woo woo!

With their little wittle nosies that go up & down, and their
fuzzy wuzzy taily-boops... Isn't that cute?

[Docrodile]

Post by JTEM

Post by Docrodile
Nothing much makes sense to me anymore. As
I approach the winter of my life, I see a species
whose meaning and purpose I increasingly question.
And a supposed supreme intelligence that must've
had a bad day long ago when he created it.

Think of kittens & little bunnies. Little fury bunnies. Fluffy
wuffy wittle bunnies -- woo, woo woo!
With their little wittle nosies that go up & down, and their
fuzzy wuzzy taily-boops... Isn't that cute?

Almost as cute as you hugging the widdle mouse and strokin' the kuddly
keyboardie for over ten delightfully warm and fuzzy useless years making
inane gooey-brained remarks, doodoo-headed arguments, and silly-willy
predictions and gettin' all hotsy and sticky on your widdle sweaty
self...how many little girly-wurly dollie parts have you got scattered
around your widdle wet sandbox now? ;))~

[JTEM]

Post by Docrodile
Almost as cute as you hugging the widdle mouse and strokin'
the kuddly keyboardie [...]

Gotta love the irony.

[Docrodile]

Post by JTEM

Post by Docrodile
Almost as cute as you hugging the widdle mouse and strokin'
the kuddly keyboardie [...]

Gotta love the irony.

I think you meant, gotta LIVE the irony...

[JTEM]

Post by Docrodile
I think

Not very likely.

[Docrodile]

Post by JTEM

Post by Docrodile
I think

Not very likely.

The only thing's that likely about you is a dead end to your already
futile life...

[Docrodile]

Post by Docrodile

Post by JTEM

Post by Docrodile
I think

Not very likely.

The only thing's that likely about you is a dead end to your already
futile life...

Or the only life that's left in your dead end is your futile life...LOL!

[JTEM]

The only thing's that [...]

*Yawn*

You've really given up. You've taken to projecting your own
anguish on me.

[Docrodile]

Post by JTEM

The only thing's that [...]

*Yawn*
You've really given up. You've taken to projecting your own
anguish on me.

How trite -- 'projecting' -- a tired ol' pop psych term that's commonly
used by the user when they're in self-denial, and being defensive.
*YAWN* *SIGH*
Jeez...you're soooooo boring.
Here's a robot you can have a meaningful conversation with. He's so much
like you.

http://www.sensationbot.com/wrapper.html?uncensored+5120da16ca7cce47bb73f0a761be6e66

LOL! $-)~

[Woodswun]

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come, and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be offline
for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the remaining available
reserves, and the profits to the oil companies. The oil itself is deep
underground, safe from radiolocical contamination. When the rad count on the
surface finally does go down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price
that the world has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits
for the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more cost
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which may end
up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that requires
some forethought, foreign territory to the current Administration ...

All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that there's
never quite enough to bring prices back down.

Woods

[Charly the Bastard]

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as the US
Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf region, under
orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense Secretary Bob Gates has
made it clear the naval deployment of two carrier task groups is meant
to send a "message" that any Iranian meddling in Iraq will be regarded
as a threat to the security of that nation, if not the entire region,
with Iraq now embroiled in what many political analysts say is a civil
war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop various
mosques from sending people over to help their fellow shiites. Kind of
like threatening to bomb the U.S. because catholic churches in the U.S.
are sending over people/supplies to catholics in northern ireland, or
synagogues are sending over people/supplies to jews in occupied
territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over Iran
reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and profit from oil.
The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years, which the US and some
Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially a tyrannical dynasty that
gave economic favor to the USA. America sold Iran huge amounts of military
hardware and, in fact, before the Ayatollah came back from exile in
France, Iran was being touted as a progressive Westernized
economic/military powerhouse-to-be with glowing major press stories
praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much against
it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet, today, it is a
major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over the political
administration, which is a democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff
at any time. Pakistan is working closely with Iran on a number of large
commercial projects, and there are many indications Pakistan would react
badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely it's
building an empire of great influence in the region for years to come, and
the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone. Surely, if they had
the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or Israel be militarily
postering? Why threaten screwing up the region for oil production and
delivery through massive destruction and radiation pollution for a long
period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be offline
for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the remaining available
reserves, and the profits to the oil companies. The oil itself is deep
underground, safe from radiolocical contamination. When the rad count on the
surface finally does go down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price
that the world has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits
for the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more cost
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which may end
up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that requires
some forethought, foreign territory to the current Administration ...
All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that there's
never quite enough to bring prices back down.
Woods

Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a Corporate, they're
the ones who really run the world. They, the Corporates, don't have to worry about
re-election every two, four, or six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic
opinion polls, They have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market
will bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply. Money is the
only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they implement. You notice
that the oil companies aren't building new refineries to increase the supply side of
the equation, because there's more money in keeping the supply short and the price
high than there is in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more
'product' to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas guzzling SUVs,
becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles than small ones. Big cars,
small cars, the number of parts is almost the same per unit, Labor is the same per
unit for assembly. Which one will bring in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that
get 12 miles per gallon and need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get
built? It's economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here, just
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.

Charly.

[Perseid]

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as
the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf
region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense
Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval deployment of two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security of
that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop
various mosques from sending people over to help their fellow
shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S. because
catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over people/supplies to
catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over
Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and
profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years,
which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA. America
sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in fact, before the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted as a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet,
today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over
the political administration, which is a democracy -- but can be
overruled by Musharoff at any time. Pakistan is working closely with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are many
indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely
it's building an empire of great influence in the region for years
to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone.
Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or
Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten screwing up the region
for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be
offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the
remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil companies.
The oil itself is deep underground, safe from radiolocical
contamination. When the rad count on the surface finally does go
down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price that the world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits for
the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more cost
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which may
end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...
All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.
Woods

Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four, or
six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls, They
have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market will
bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply.
Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they
implement.

There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.

Post by Charly the Bastard
You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because there's
more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there is
in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more 'product'
to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles than
small ones.

But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will bring
in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon and
need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here, just
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.

There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car companies
can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are a perfect
example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've just wasted
all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's economics 101.

You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Charly.

[Docrodile]

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as
the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf
region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense
Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval deployment of two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security of
that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop
various mosques from sending people over to help their fellow
shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S. because
catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over people/supplies to
catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over
Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and
profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years,
which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was
essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA. America
sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in fact, before the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted as a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet,
today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over
the political administration, which is a democracy -- but can be
overruled by Musharoff at any time. Pakistan is working closely with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are many
indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely
it's building an empire of great influence in the region for years
to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone.
Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or
Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten screwing up the region
for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be
offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the
remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil companies.
The oil itself is deep underground, safe from radiolocical
contamination. When the rad count on the surface finally does go
down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price that the world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits for
the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more cost
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which may
end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...
All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.
Woods

Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four, or
six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls, They
have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market will
bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply.
Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they
implement.

There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.

Post by Charly the Bastard
You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because there's
more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there is
in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more 'product'
to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles than
small ones.

But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will bring
in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon and
need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here, just
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.

There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car companies
can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are a perfect
example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've just wasted
all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's economics 101.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.

Whether there's a conspiracy or a PLAN or not, the end result is the
same -- we get screwed at this level. What does it matter? If we knew
there was collusion going on, what the hell are we to do with it? We're
dependent on corporate services and products for our everyday existence.
Unless you're a real indie trooper and want to trail blaze away from the
corporate tit, you and most all of us 'consumers' out here are trapped in
a life made for us, but not by us. We went along with all the conveniences
and accepted the power structure that rules over us. Even our democracy is
basically a sham now, controlled by corporate monied influences...which,
again, has been caused by our complacency. The corporate world provides
lots of distractions -- get interested in Bowflexing your asses off, diet,
buy new things, get narcissistic, hedonistic, materialistic as hell --
that burn up much of our time and energy, and they'd like to keep it that
way...and apparently so would most of us. Where is the resistance, the
risk taking to throw it off and go another direction, radically? Dont'
see it out there!
And you know why, I do, all of us do...and it's damned hard to face up to
it and ourselves. We live in a virtual self-imposed hive-like prison,
ruled over a relatively small group of elitists, but followed sheepishly
by most of the herd.
Face it, Charly and Perseid...we're living under another form of tyranny
as humanity has all of its recorded history, and this one, though, could
be changed if it weren't for all that risk that needs to be taken...all
that discomfort...all that fear of what may happen if we stopped sucking
on the BIG TIT everyday.
Docrodile ;)~

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
Charly.

[Perseid Rocks]

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as
the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf
region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense
Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval deployment of two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security of
that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop
various mosques from sending people over to help their fellow
shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S. because
catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over people/supplies to
catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over
Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and
profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many years,
which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was
essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA. America
sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in fact, before the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted as a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet,
today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over
the political administration, which is a democracy -- but can be
overruled by Musharoff at any time. Pakistan is working closely with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are many
indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely
it's building an empire of great influence in the region for years
to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone.
Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or
Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten screwing up the region
for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be
offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the
remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil companies.
The oil itself is deep underground, safe from radiolocical
contamination. When the rad count on the surface finally does go
down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price that the world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits for
the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more cost
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which may
end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...
All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.
Woods

Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four, or
six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls, They
have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market will
bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply.
Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they
implement.

There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.

Post by Charly the Bastard
You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because there's
more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there is
in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more 'product'
to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles than
small ones.

But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will bring
in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon and
need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here, just
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.

There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car companies
can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are a perfect
example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've just wasted
all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's economics 101.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.

Whether there's a conspiracy or a PLAN or not, the end result is the
same -- we get screwed at this level. What does it matter? If we knew
there was collusion going on, what the hell are we to do with it? We're
dependent on corporate services and products for our everyday existence.
Unless you're a real indie trooper and want to trail blaze away from the
corporate tit, you and most all of us 'consumers' out here are trapped in
a life made for us, but not by us. We went along with all the

conveniences

Post by Docrodile
and accepted the power structure that rules over us. Even our democracy is
basically a sham now, controlled by corporate monied influences...which,
again, has been caused by our complacency. The corporate world provides
lots of distractions -- get interested in Bowflexing your asses off, diet,
buy new things, get narcissistic, hedonistic, materialistic as hell --
that burn up much of our time and energy, and they'd like to keep it that
way...and apparently so would most of us. Where is the resistance, the
risk taking to throw it off and go another direction, radically? Dont'
see it out there!
And you know why, I do, all of us do...and it's damned hard to face up to
it and ourselves. We live in a virtual self-imposed hive-like prison,
ruled over a relatively small group of elitists, but followed sheepishly
by most of the herd.
Face it, Charly and Perseid...we're living under another form of tyranny
as humanity has all of its recorded history, and this one, though, could
be changed if it weren't for all that risk that needs to be taken...all
that discomfort...all that fear of what may happen if we stopped sucking
on the BIG TIT everyday.

I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).

We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.

The people have all the control over the Corporate BigWigs since
by simply DENYING our attention to certain things we can make
them dance around like leap-frogs. It's quite satisfying actually,
knowing that my own subtle actions every day causes the corporate
bunny-hoppers to scramble about madly trying to figure out just
what the hell went wrong.

Post by Docrodile
Docrodile ;)~

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
Charly.

[Charly the Bastard]

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as
the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf
region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense
Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval deployment of two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security

of

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop
various mosques from sending people over to help their fellow
shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S. because
catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over people/supplies

to

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun
catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over
Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and
profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many

years,

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile
which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA. America
sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in fact, before the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted as a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet,
today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over
the political administration, which is a democracy -- but can be
overruled by Musharoff at any time. Pakistan is working closely with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are many
indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely
it's building an empire of great influence in the region for years
to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone.
Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or
Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten screwing up the

region

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile
for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be
offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the
remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil companies.
The oil itself is deep underground, safe from radiolocical
contamination. When the rad count on the surface finally does go
down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price that the world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits for
the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more

cost

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which

may

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun
end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...
All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.
Woods

Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four, or
six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls, They
have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market will
bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply.
Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they
implement.

There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.

Post by Charly the Bastard
You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because

there's

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there

is

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more 'product'
to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles than
small ones.

But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will

bring

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon and
need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here,

just

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.

There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car companies
can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are a perfect
example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've just wasted
all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's economics 101.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.

Whether there's a conspiracy or a PLAN or not, the end result is the
same -- we get screwed at this level. What does it matter? If we knew
there was collusion going on, what the hell are we to do with it? We're
dependent on corporate services and products for our everyday existence.
Unless you're a real indie trooper and want to trail blaze away from the
corporate tit, you and most all of us 'consumers' out here are trapped

in

Post by Docrodile
a life made for us, but not by us. We went along with all the

conveniences

Post by Docrodile
and accepted the power structure that rules over us. Even our democracy

is

Post by Docrodile
basically a sham now, controlled by corporate monied influences...which,
again, has been caused by our complacency. The corporate world provides
lots of distractions -- get interested in Bowflexing your asses off,

diet,

Post by Docrodile
buy new things, get narcissistic, hedonistic, materialistic as hell --
that burn up much of our time and energy, and they'd like to keep it

that

Post by Docrodile
way...and apparently so would most of us. Where is the resistance, the
risk taking to throw it off and go another direction, radically? Dont'
see it out there!
And you know why, I do, all of us do...and it's damned hard to face up

to

Post by Docrodile
it and ourselves. We live in a virtual self-imposed hive-like prison,
ruled over a relatively small group of elitists, but followed sheepishly
by most of the herd.
Face it, Charly and Perseid...we're living under another form of tyranny
as humanity has all of its recorded history, and this one, though, could
be changed if it weren't for all that risk that needs to be taken...all
that discomfort...all that fear of what may happen if we stopped sucking
on the BIG TIT everyday.

I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).
We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.
The people have all the control over the Corporate BigWigs since
by simply DENYING our attention to certain things we can make
them dance around like leap-frogs. It's quite satisfying actually,
knowing that my own subtle actions every day causes the corporate
bunny-hoppers to scramble about madly trying to figure out just
what the hell went wrong.

Ever tried making your own clothes, from scratch? How about a car? Or drinking
water that's pure enough to not kill you? Not buying certain products is
futile. Other corporations will jump into the gap left by consumer boycotts,
and we're back to square one again. Federal Government? Hah! The Corporates
ARE the government. Try to get a meaningful response out of your Erected
Reprehensible without writing your query on the back of a $10,000 bill.
Congrease knows who the real constituency is; the ones with the millions of
dollars to finance their campaigns. Average voters don't mean shit to Senator
Snort, he's too busy sucking up to Exxon and Helliburton for that Big
Donation. Labor unions used to be a power block, but twenty years of
outsourcing have gutted their membership to the Pacific Rim, China, and Latin
America, so they're not much of a threat to Corporate interests and influence.
There is no good solution, only a choice of bad ones. We are come to the end
of the path, and no matter what ideology we try, the Corporates win. Perhaps
the Mooby solution is the only course left to us, or pray for an Impact Event.

Charly

[Perseid Rocks]

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately
as the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian
Gulf region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new
Defense Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval
deployment of two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security

of

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to
stop various mosques from sending people over to help their
fellow shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S.
because catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over
people/supplies

to

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun
catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern
over Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control
and profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for
many

years,

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile
which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA.
America sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in
fact, before the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted as a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very
much against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that
nation. Yet, today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a
dictator ruling over the political administration, which is a
democracy -- but can be overruled by Musharoff at any time.
Pakistan is working closely with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are
many indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on
Iran. Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more
likely it's building an empire of great influence in the region
for years to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that
cornerstone. Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now,
would the USA or Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten
screwing up the

region

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile
for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will
be offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price
on the remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil
companies. The oil itself is deep underground, safe from
radiolocical contamination. When the rad count on the surface
finally does go down, it can be exploited at the new much higher
price that the world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits
for the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more

cost

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which

may

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun
end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...
All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.
Woods

Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four,
or six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls,
They have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the
market will bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions
of supply.
Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy
they implement.

There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.

Post by Charly the Bastard
You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because

there's

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there

is

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more
'product' to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car
companies are dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles than
small ones.

But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will

bring

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon
and need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here,

just

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.

There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car
companies can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are
a perfect example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've
just wasted all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's
economics 101.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.

Whether there's a conspiracy or a PLAN or not, the end result is the
same -- we get screwed at this level. What does it matter? If we knew
there was collusion going on, what the hell are we to do with it?
We're dependent on corporate services and products for our everyday
existence. Unless you're a real indie trooper and want to trail blaze
away from the corporate tit, you and most all of us 'consumers' out
here are trapped

in

Post by Docrodile
a life made for us, but not by us. We went along with all the

conveniences

Post by Docrodile
and accepted the power structure that rules over us. Even our democracy

is

Post by Docrodile
basically a sham now, controlled by corporate monied
influences...which, again, has been caused by our complacency. The
corporate world provides lots of distractions -- get interested in
Bowflexing your asses off,

diet,

Post by Docrodile
buy new things, get narcissistic, hedonistic, materialistic as hell
-- that burn up much of our time and energy, and they'd like to keep
it

that

Post by Docrodile
way...and apparently so would most of us. Where is the resistance,
the risk taking to throw it off and go another direction, radically?
Dont' see it out there!
And you know why, I do, all of us do...and it's damned hard to face up

to

Post by Docrodile
it and ourselves. We live in a virtual self-imposed hive-like prison,
ruled over a relatively small group of elitists, but followed
sheepishly by most of the herd.
Face it, Charly and Perseid...we're living under another form of
tyranny as humanity has all of its recorded history, and this one,
though, could be changed if it weren't for all that risk that needs
to be taken...all that discomfort...all that fear of what may happen
if we stopped sucking on the BIG TIT everyday.

I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).
We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.
The people have all the control over the Corporate BigWigs since
by simply DENYING our attention to certain things we can make
them dance around like leap-frogs. It's quite satisfying actually,
knowing that my own subtle actions every day causes the corporate
bunny-hoppers to scramble about madly trying to figure out just
what the hell went wrong.

Ever tried making your own clothes, from scratch? How about a car? Or
drinking water that's pure enough to not kill you? Not buying certain
products is futile. Other corporations will jump into the gap left by
consumer boycotts, and we're back to square one again. Federal
Government? Hah! The Corporates ARE the government. Try to get a
meaningful response out of your Erected Reprehensible without writing
your query on the back of a $10,000 bill. Congrease knows who the real
constituency is; the ones with the millions of dollars to finance their
campaigns. Average voters don't mean shit to Senator Snort, he's too
busy sucking up to Exxon and Helliburton for that Big Donation. Labor
unions used to be a power block, but twenty years of outsourcing have
gutted their membership to the Pacific Rim, China, and Latin America, so
they're not much of a threat to Corporate interests and influence. There
is no good solution, only a choice of bad ones. We are come to the end
of the path, and no matter what ideology we try, the Corporates win.
Perhaps the Mooby solution is the only course left to us, or pray for an
Impact Event.

What exactly are you trying to convince me of here, charly ? This
looks like a sales pitch, but it's not clear what you're selling
other than revolution and social change.

As far as making my own products from scratch, this point doesn't
dissuade me from my earlier stated opinion. If I don't like
company A or it's products I'll go with company B, thereby
running company A out of business. My previously stated opinion
still stands that consumers hold all the power.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Charly

[Docrodile]

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately

What exactly are you trying to convince me of here, charly ? This
looks like a sales pitch, but it's not clear what you're selling
other than revolution and social change.
As far as making my own products from scratch, this point doesn't
dissuade me from my earlier stated opinion. If I don't like
company A or it's products I'll go with company B, thereby
running company A out of business. My previously stated opinion
still stands that consumers hold all the power.

And what are the choices the consumers make? Gee...I'm gettin' tired of
heavily processed food, like TV dinners and lunch meats, and I'm gonna' go
all natural, baby! LOL! Let's see, where are all those 'liberating'
natural foods...oh, my heavens, they're soooo expensive...well, that's
alright, they're sooo much healthier for my Temple of Precious Bodiness.
heeheeheee. get my drift?
Docrodile ;)

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
Charly

[Perseid Rocks]

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
What exactly are you trying to convince me of here, charly ? This
looks like a sales pitch, but it's not clear what you're selling
other than revolution and social change.
As far as making my own products from scratch, this point doesn't
dissuade me from my earlier stated opinion. If I don't like
company A or it's products I'll go with company B, thereby
running company A out of business. My previously stated opinion
still stands that consumers hold all the power.

And what are the choices the consumers make? Gee...I'm gettin'
tired of heavily processed food, like TV dinners and lunch meats,
and I'm gonna' go all natural, baby! LOL! Let's see, where are
all those 'liberating' natural foods...oh, my heavens, they're
soooo expensive...well, that's alright, they're sooo much
healthier for my Temple of Precious Bodiness.
heeheeheee. get my drift?

Ever considered getting into gardening ? My mother used to have
me help her with planting and caring for a vegetable garden about
30 square ft in size.

If you really want to get back to your roots then get a small
parcel of land (raw land is dirt cheap, no pun intended), buy
some pigs, chickens, and maybe a cow, and set up a farm.

Seems like your real argument here is that we're too inter-
dependent. Whether we've 'gone over the edge' in allowing
others to provide for our needs is debatable, but you always
have the choice of providing more of your own raw needs through
farming or animal ranching... but that's a lot of work and you'd
find that out. Again, the choice is yours, not that of some
mystical corporate controller in some far off board room.

Post by Docrodile
Docrodile ;)

[Docrodile]

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
What exactly are you trying to convince me of here, charly ? This
looks like a sales pitch, but it's not clear what you're selling
other than revolution and social change.
As far as making my own products from scratch, this point doesn't
dissuade me from my earlier stated opinion. If I don't like
company A or it's products I'll go with company B, thereby
running company A out of business. My previously stated opinion
still stands that consumers hold all the power.

And what are the choices the consumers make? Gee...I'm gettin'
tired of heavily processed food, like TV dinners and lunch meats,
and I'm gonna' go all natural, baby! LOL! Let's see, where are
all those 'liberating' natural foods...oh, my heavens, they're
soooo expensive...well, that's alright, they're sooo much
healthier for my Temple of Precious Bodiness.
heeheeheee. get my drift?

Ever considered getting into gardening ? My mother used to have
me help her with planting and caring for a vegetable garden about
30 square ft in size.
If you really want to get back to your roots then get a small
parcel of land (raw land is dirt cheap, no pun intended), buy
some pigs, chickens, and maybe a cow, and set up a farm.
Seems like your real argument here is that we're too inter-
dependent. Whether we've 'gone over the edge' in allowing
others to provide for our needs is debatable, but you always
have the choice of providing more of your own raw needs through
farming or animal ranching... but that's a lot of work and you'd
find that out. Again, the choice is yours, not that of some
mystical corporate controller in some far off board room.

Post by Docrodile
Docrodile ;)

Well, Perseid, where am I gonna get the health to work a pea patch? And,
if someone donated one, and I had my health back, then I'd certainly give
it a try. Many folks live in apartments and have no access to a plot of
ground. They can produce limited amounts of food inside under halides or
sodium vapor lights, but the production is very limited and the bulbs are
expensive.

It's not that people can't do these things, it's that the common human
behavior is to rely on others to do many things. It's been that way for a
very long time. Even during my folks farm and ranch days, they still had
to rely on others although they were mostly self-sufficient. I spent an
entire summer as a 11 year old on my uncle's feeder-cattle ranch near Cour
de' Lane, Idaho. I learned much about growing things, taking care of
cattle, horses, pigs, and chickens. And I learned how to ride a
gelding...not a pony! Yep, I understand it's a lot of hard work and that's
another reason why people who work 40 hr. weeks in office, tech,
industrial jobs are unlikely to get involved in producing their own food
stuffs. But, in goes much deeper than food -- the electricity, water,
phone, medical services, et al, are things most are not gonna create
independently, but they of course may work for these services, as many do.

It's nice to think about a self-sustaining culture that can say 'fuck you'
to the corporate greed and dominance, but the hard reality is that most of
us will be under its big thumb till the end. It's not that we can't make
lesser changes that affect companies' profits and, hence, their control
over our lives -- yes, certainly, we can and do make those decisions for
our individual lives to some degree. We're not going to toss most or all
of it out, though, and likely keep being codependent. I use the word,
codependent, because psychologically a codependent person seeks out their
completeness and fulfillment as an individual in the support of, and
dependence on another. That describes our interrelationship with the
corporate world -- and they know it well, and exploit it. Everyday, what
do you hear? "Be your own man, buy a Hummer." LOL! Well, hell, I can't be
a real man unless I spend $100,000 on that contraption. As stupid as it
sounds, the ads snare enough insecure, ass-licking, narcissistic people to
keep the money flooding in. Almost all advertising is aimed at our
character weaknesses...and, man, do they get down and dirty with us!
"Baby, you're worth it!" is another. Get self-absorbed, be hedonistic, and
accept the paradigm, damnit!
Docrodile :)~

[Charly the Bastard]

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

massive snippage

Post by Perseid
What exactly are you trying to convince me of here, charly ? This
looks like a sales pitch, but it's not clear what you're selling
other than revolution and social change.

What I'm 'selling' here is a return to the system that our Floundering Fathers
envisioned. That will entail reducing the influence of the corporate
conglomerate on Congrease, and increasing the influence of the 'average
voter'. A first good step is to cut out the bribe money that the Corporates
pump into campaigns on both sides of the aisle. Money is not speech. Watch
the coverage of the upcoming '08 campaigns. There is more talk about how much
money a candidate can raise than the issues a candidate stands for. A second
good step would be merit tests for prospective candidates. "Just what real
managerial skills do you bring to this position? You won a Heisman in
college?" (JC Watts (R, OK) springs to mind here) While we're at it, we could
flush the Electoral College. It might have been useful in the day of horseback
communication, but we can now tally the votes in realtime, (assuming we can
get a SECURE system up and running) and it's as obsolete as the buggywhip. We
might want to take a hard look at political parties too; they're nothing but a
huge graft mill right now. We're in deep kimche, what we need is real
management and real leadership, not popularity contests and institutional
influence peddling. If we had spent the money that we've wasted to date on
this military fiasco on R&D for a viable alternative energy source, we'd have
it going online today, and the Arabs would be obsolete. Revolution? Nah. Much
needed upgrades? You betcha. Social change? Most definitely, hopefully for the
better.

Charly

[Docrodile]

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

massive snippage

Post by Perseid
What exactly are you trying to convince me of here, charly ? This
looks like a sales pitch, but it's not clear what you're selling
other than revolution and social change.

What I'm 'selling' here is a return to the system that our Floundering Fathers
envisioned. That will entail reducing the influence of the corporate
conglomerate on Congrease, and increasing the influence of the 'average
voter'. A first good step is to cut out the bribe money that the Corporates
pump into campaigns on both sides of the aisle. Money is not speech.
Watch
the coverage of the upcoming '08 campaigns. There is more talk about how much
money a candidate can raise than the issues a candidate stands for. A second
good step would be merit tests for prospective candidates. "Just what real
managerial skills do you bring to this position? You won a Heisman in
college?" (JC Watts (R, OK) springs to mind here) While we're at it, we could
flush the Electoral College.

Something I've been advocating for years! Get rid of 'representational'
population-proportional vote tallies! Who needs 'em? In 2000, Gore gets
500,000 more popular votes than the Chimp, and still loses. What the hell
kind of fairness is this? A democracy where the 'majority decides'?? Jeez!

It might have been useful in the day of horseback

Post by Charly the Bastard
communication, but we can now tally the votes in realtime, (assuming we can
get a SECURE system up and running) and it's as obsolete as the buggywhip. We
might want to take a hard look at political parties too; they're nothing but a
huge graft mill right now. We're in deep kimche, what we need is real
management and real leadership, not popularity contests and
institutional
influence peddling.

What?! You mean you don't think Obama's rock-hard athletic body is a
worthy prerequisite for the position of Prez/Commander in Chief? I just
had a tired ol' laugh when the news showed Obama in swim trunks recently.
Here we have a guy who knows how to write a decent speech, deliver it
fairly well, but has little experience as an administrator at the national
level. Not to say he isn't a nice guy with a good affable personality, but
I don't think we need to have our voters' primary criteria for a top
leader set at how sociable and sexy they might be! Sheesh...after the
Terminator was voted in (twice!), I began to lose interest in our
political process. And, not because the process sucks, but the nature of
human behavior does. Many voters are just plain stupid, while others have
a thing I call "leader addiction" that mirrors drug addiction in many
ways.
Docrodile

If we had spent the money that we've wasted to date on

Post by Charly the Bastard
this military fiasco on R&D for a viable alternative energy source, we'd have
it going online today, and the Arabs would be obsolete. Revolution? Nah. Much
needed upgrades? You betcha. Social change? Most definitely, hopefully for the
better.
Charly

[Perseid]

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

massive snippage

Post by Perseid
What exactly are you trying to convince me of here, charly ? This
looks like a sales pitch, but it's not clear what you're selling
other than revolution and social change.

What I'm 'selling' here is a return to the system that our Floundering
Fathers envisioned. That will entail reducing the influence of the
corporate conglomerate on Congrease, and increasing the influence of the
'average voter'. A first good step is to cut out the bribe money that
the Corporates pump into campaigns on both sides of the aisle. Money is
not speech. Watch the coverage of the upcoming '08 campaigns. There is
more talk about how much money a candidate can raise than the issues a
candidate stands for. A second good step would be merit tests for
prospective candidates. "Just what real managerial skills do you bring
to this position? You won a Heisman in college?" (JC Watts (R, OK)
springs to mind here) While we're at it, we could flush the Electoral
College. It might have been useful in the day of horseback
communication, but we can now tally the votes in realtime, (assuming we
can get a SECURE system up and running) and it's as obsolete as the
buggywhip. We might want to take a hard look at political parties too;
they're nothing but a huge graft mill right now. We're in deep kimche,
what we need is real management and real leadership, not popularity
contests and institutional influence peddling. If we had spent the money
that we've wasted to date on this military fiasco on R&D for a viable
alternative energy source, we'd have it going online today, and the
Arabs would be obsolete. Revolution? Nah. Much needed upgrades? You
betcha. Social change? Most definitely, hopefully for the better.

Check this out. I read this article today, but it's already
been pulled. I wonder why.

federal contractors proliferate
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/nation/4524531.html
Houston Chronicle, TX - Feb 3, 2007
And it is no secret that some government executives favor
contractors because they find the federal bureaucracy slow,
inflexible or incompetent. ...

You can see that it once was there if you simply google search
for news articles with that title.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Charly

[Docrodile]

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
Iranians may be getting a bad case of pre-war jitters lately as
the US Navy builds its floating arsenal in the Persian Gulf
region, under orders from President Bush. Bush's new Defense
Secretary Bob Gates has made it clear the naval deployment of two
carrier task groups is meant to send a "message" that any Iranian
meddling in Iraq will be regarded as a threat to the security

of

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun

Post by Dr. Bipolar
that nation, if not the entire region, with Iraq now embroiled in
what many political analysts say is a civil war.

I'd like to know how Bush expects the government of Iran to stop
various mosques from sending people over to help their fellow
shiites. Kind of like threatening to bomb the U.S. because
catholic churches in the U.S. are sending over people/supplies

to

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile

Post by Woodswun
catholics in northern ireland, or synagogues are sending over
people/supplies to jews in occupied territories.
Woods

Well, of course, he can't do it. And, IMO, all this concern over
Iran reaches way back to the US/West's attempts to control and
profit from oil. The Pahlevi family that ruled Iran for many

years,

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile
which the US and some Western allies, greatly aided, was essentially
a tyrannical dynasty that gave economic favor to the USA. America
sold Iran huge amounts of military hardware and, in fact, before the
Ayatollah came back from exile in France, Iran was being touted
as
a
progressive Westernized economic/military powerhouse-to-be with
glowing major press stories praising it.
Before Pakistan developed nuclear weaponry, the US was very much
against it, and slapped a number of sanctions on that nation. Yet,
today, it is a major Muslim WOT ally, with a dictator ruling over
the political administration, which is a democracy -- but can be
overruled by Musharoff at any time. Pakistan is working closely with
Iran on a number of large commercial projects, and there are many
indications Pakistan would react badly to a US attack on Iran.
Sure, Iran may attack with nukes some day, but it is more likely
it's building an empire of great influence in the region for years
to come, and the nuke aspect is a major part of that cornerstone.
Surely, if they had the nuke weapons right now, would the USA or
Israel be militarily postering? Why threaten screwing up the

region

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Docrodile
for oil production and delivery through massive destruction and
radiation pollution for a long period?

Think long term... if the US nukes Iran, the oil production will be
offline for at least a decade. This will drive up the price on the
remaining available reserves, and the profits to the oil
companies.
The oil itself is deep underground, safe from radiolocical
contamination. When the rad count on the surface finally does go
down, it can be exploited at the new much higher price that the world
has by then gotten used to, with resultant exhorbitant profits for
the oil companies. Makes prefekt sense to me.

Not really. If oil goes up that high, it becomes much, much more

cost

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun
effective to develop alternative fuels and fuel efficiency - which

may

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Woodswun
end up sidelining the oil companies altogether. Then again, that
requires some forethought, foreign territory to the current
Administration ...
All they really need is another Katrina or accidents timed so that
there's never quite enough to bring prices back down.
Woods

Ignore the administration, they don't get to think. Think like a
Corporate, they're the ones who really run the world. They, the
Corporates, don't have to worry about re-election every two, four, or
six years. They don't pay any attention to pubic opinion polls, They
have an agenda, and that is to make as much profit as the market will
bear at all times, regardless of temporary interuptions of supply.
Money
is the only God they know, and power is the name of the strategy they
implement.

There you go. Oil prices go too high, people start changing their
behaviors including driving less and telecommuting, companies start
responding by introducing more fuel and cost efficient products.

Post by Charly the Bastard
You notice that the oil companies aren't building new
refineries to increase the supply side of the equation, because

there's

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
more money in keeping the supply short and the price high than there

is

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
in actually increasing the supply so that there will be more 'product'
to vend to the consumer. You notice that the car companies are dragging
their feet on 'alternative fuel vehicles' and still building gas
guzzling SUVs, becuase there's more profit per unit in big vehicles than
small ones.

But if nobody is buying the SUV's then the car companies have
wasted all that money developing and building them. Car companies
can't afford to waste money like that or they go out of business.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Big cars, small cars, the number of parts is almost the same
per unit, Labor is the same per unit for assembly. Which one will

bring

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
in more per unit bucks? The Big ones that get 12 miles per gallon and
need premium grade fuel. So... guess which ones get built? It's
economics 101 at work. And we get told 'there's no consiracy here,

just

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
'free market forces''... yeah right, you bet.

There is no conspiracy, other than auto-makers wanting to make a
profit and supply-demand controlling the marketplace. The car companies
can build dinosaurs all they want, and US auto makers are a perfect
example of this, but if no one will buy them then they've just wasted
all that money on R&D and production. As you say, it's economics 101.
You seem to be overlooking the fact that consumers are really the
ones giving power to those big companies, through their buying
decisions.

Whether there's a conspiracy or a PLAN or not, the end result is the
same -- we get screwed at this level. What does it matter? If we knew
there was collusion going on, what the hell are we to do with it? We're
dependent on corporate services and products for our everyday
existence.
Unless you're a real indie trooper and want to trail blaze away from the
corporate tit, you and most all of us 'consumers' out here are trapped

in

Post by Docrodile
a life made for us, but not by us. We went along with all the

conveniences

Post by Docrodile
and accepted the power structure that rules over us. Even our democracy

is

Post by Docrodile
basically a sham now, controlled by corporate monied
influences...which,
again, has been caused by our complacency. The corporate world provides
lots of distractions -- get interested in Bowflexing your asses off,

diet,

Post by Docrodile
buy new things, get narcissistic, hedonistic, materialistic as hell --
that burn up much of our time and energy, and they'd like to keep it

that

Post by Docrodile
way...and apparently so would most of us. Where is the resistance, the
risk taking to throw it off and go another direction, radically? Dont'
see it out there!
And you know why, I do, all of us do...and it's damned hard to face up

to

Post by Docrodile
it and ourselves. We live in a virtual self-imposed hive-like prison,
ruled over a relatively small group of elitists, but followed
sheepishly
by most of the herd.
Face it, Charly and Perseid...we're living under another form of tyranny
as humanity has all of its recorded history, and this one, though, could
be changed if it weren't for all that risk that needs to be taken...all
that discomfort...all that fear of what may happen if we stopped sucking
on the BIG TIT everyday.

I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).

It all distills down into dependence on someone to live our lives. We can
give up being dependent on someone, but who survives as an island? How
many can you count that you know who do? Realistically, we all depend on
someone to do something for us, or provide a product...yeah, we COULD
produce everything ourselves, each and every one of us, independently of
each other, but that isn't going to be our reality, nor has it been since
civilization dawned. Let's look at the hard reality of our lives. We are
trapped by powers that we don't want to risk throwing off, and content
(with antidepressants, toys, narcissism, et al) to keep going in this
direction, this pathway that's been made for us, and accepted by us. We
didn't make the pathway. Greedy powerful people were allowed to construct
the paradigm we complacently accepted.

Post by Perseid Rocks
We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.

Yeah, Perseid, you're right We CAN and DO, to some limited degree, control
the products and services we use. But, then, realistically, how many
people are going to do this? Enough that the entire structure is no longer
one of co-dependence, and we just begin to be our own manufacturers of
things we need, service we need? Again, it's a nice utopian-esque
thought, but it falls to the wayside in the harsh reality that most folks
out there ain't gonna 'cut the mustard' and take off into a wholly radical
DIY direction...sure, they'll dibble-dabble, experiment with
independence...but, when, for example (of so many), you need electricity,
are you gonna generate your own? You can get some like-minded folks
together, and start up a windwill generator, and hook your homes up, but
then you run into...the...BIG TIT people, don't ya? And if your indie
project gets too large, the BIG TIT folks get tougher as they lose profits
and control of a market. Then, let's say, you succeed, and you get your
indie electric grid spread over a large area...will the abuses
(monopolization, greed, etc.) set in on the people who've organized this
new system? Yes, likely, because what I'm really trying to underscore is
that basic human nature naturally gravitates toward controlling others,
dominating others, getting selfish and self-centered, getting corrupted in
some manner that defeats the original fresh, new concept. That's what
happened to our democracy here...and it happens repeatedly through history
when attempts are made to defeat one power structure of tyranny ...
another one eventually creeps into replace it.

Post by Perseid Rocks
The people have all the control over the Corporate BigWigs since
by simply DENYING our attention to certain things we can make
them dance around like leap-frogs. It's quite satisfying actually,
knowing that my own subtle actions every day causes the corporate
bunny-hoppers to scramble about madly trying to figure out just
what the hell went wrong.

No, Perseid, that's what you want to believe because it makes you feel
you're not complacent, or trapped, or beholden to others in a hard
co-dependency for services and products. It sounds liberating, but are you
gonna step out of this structure of corporate-controlled lifestyles and
blaze your trail? And will that trail end up corrupted, self-defeated? I
think so. I've talked just like you so many times, thought those thoughts,
and thrown 'em around to people...it makes me feel I'm a rebel, that I'm
not caught up in this controlling corporate world, and then...as my life
ebbs away now from numerous health problems...I'm having to face what kind
of life I've had...and why we go through it to the end the way we do. The
bunny-hoppers...LOL! Yeah, we like to call 'em names and stick our bare
asses out at 'em, flip 'em the bird, and spit on their influences, their
lies, their schemes, their greed...but we are not angels devoid of serious
problems in our own behaviors, are we? One of the worst is getting pissed
at something we know doesn't do us any good, but are unable to risk the
scary shit to move away from it and stand alone against all that comes
down on us for doing so. Even when we stand together, defiant, and I've
certainly been in many protests to know the community feeling -- still, we
find that our basic nature of protecting ourselves from harm often
overrides our idealism. It's a bad feeling to admit it, but at this late
stage of my life, I've nothing much left to lose now by facing up to
things that I think I always knew were disquieting facts....and yet unable
to admit I've been hypocritical, as is everyone to some degree, and not
taken the trail blazing path I could have...as we all can, of
course...but, I reiterate, that the risks are far too great, too scary,
too damaging for the great majority (and I'm talking 95%) to take. And
then there's that basic human nature that has ultimately corrupted the
trails of the trailblazers...as our founding fathers were, IMO -- and had
their trails lead to the shitty, subservient, codependent, lying, greedy,
power-mad mess we're in right now. I really feel we can't have anything
resembling our utopian, or altruistic dreams but for a very short time,
and then it drifts into what we see historically, and what we live in now.
Jeezuz..I wish I could keep thinking 'something' magnificently radical
will change in our human nature, but I'm resigned to accepting the hard
fact we're now as we've always been, and we're just as likely to stay that
way.
Docrodile :)~

Post by Perseid Rocks

Post by Docrodile
Docrodile ;)~

Post by Perseid

Post by Charly the Bastard
Charly.

[Perseid Rocks]

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).

It all distills down into dependence on someone to live our lives. We can
give up being dependent on someone, but who survives as an island? How
many can you count that you know who do? Realistically, we all depend on
someone to do something for us, or provide a product...yeah, we COULD
produce everything ourselves, each and every one of us, independently of
each other, but that isn't going to be our reality, nor has it been since
civilization dawned. Let's look at the hard reality of our lives. We are
trapped by powers that we don't want to risk throwing off, and content
(with antidepressants, toys, narcissism, et al)

You don't have to live with daily doses of non-prescription drugs.
You don't have to watch tv ads. You don't have to buy toys which
feed your ego. In short, if you feel trapped by this socio-economic
structure, it's because you've allowed yourself to becomed trapped
by it.

Try going for a hike in the mountains every other day. Read a
good book, learn a new language, expand your mind and horizon.
Break out of the entrapment. Take control.

Post by Docrodile
to keep going in this
direction, this pathway that's been made for us, and accepted by us. We
didn't make the pathway. Greedy powerful people were allowed to construct
the paradigm we complacently accepted.

I'm ok with some company making something that I can buy
which makes my life easier. Personally, I feel more entrapped
by daily chores than anything else.

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.

Yeah, Perseid, you're right We CAN and DO, to some limited degree, control
the products and services we use. But, then, realistically, how many
people are going to do this? Enough that the entire structure is no longer
one of co-dependence, and we just begin to be our own manufacturers of
things we need, service we need?

Again, I have no complaints about some company making a profit
by making something useful that I might want to buy.

Post by Docrodile
Again, it's a nice utopian-esque thought

[Docrodile]

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).

It all distills down into dependence on someone to live our lives. We

can

Post by Docrodile
give up being dependent on someone, but who survives as an island? How
many can you count that you know who do? Realistically, we all depend on
someone to do something for us, or provide a product...yeah, we COULD
produce everything ourselves, each and every one of us, independently of
each other, but that isn't going to be our reality, nor has it been

since

Post by Docrodile
civilization dawned. Let's look at the hard reality of our lives. We are
trapped by powers that we don't want to risk throwing off, and content
(with antidepressants, toys, narcissism, et al)

You don't have to live with daily doses of non-prescription drugs.
You don't have to watch tv ads. You don't have to buy toys which
feed your ego. In short, if you feel trapped by this socio-economic
structure, it's because you've allowed yourself to becomed trapped
by it.
Try going for a hike in the mountains every other day. Read a
good book, learn a new language, expand your mind and horizon.
Break out of the entrapment. Take control.

Sounds like a speech to the Sierra Club... LOL! (I think you forget my age
and I'm well educated, and have experienced many things.)

When you get your backpack on, where did you get it from? Water bottle?
Clothes? Shoes? Underwear? Toothpaste and brush? Munchies? If you get a
headache, where did the aspirin or acetaminophen (etc) come from?
Transportation to the starting point for the 'breakaway freedom hike' --
where did the transporatation come from? The gas for it? The bicycle?
No, we don't have to do 'anything' that is the standard consumer
lifestyle -- that's true. We don't HAVE to. You're right. And, I
reiterate -- how many will choose to accept the easiest, most convenient
path? Most. And how will your rebellion, your resistance, change the
paradigm if you continue to rely heavily on the creators of it, and what
they provide? Cherry picking in your lifestyle, while remaining largely
codependent on the corporate TIT, isn't an expansion of anything
liberating -- it's a resignation, a denial, a delusion that you're moving
beyond 'the masses' into some freewheeling world of DIY, rugged
individualism, iconoclastic trail-blazing.
You might as well be a prisoner in a state institution and fantasize that
the spiritual and intellectual exercises have 'liberated' you from the
prison's electric fences and guards. And, in a way, you'd be right. Your
mind can be liberated, to be sure, but the body remains imprisoned. So, if
you're talking philosophical liberation, I can agree. But, that isn't what
you're talking about, really, is it? And the fact you're pushing it down
here, pretty hard, now is a good indication that what I said is bothering
you. From my perspective, Perseid, which I suspect is quite different from
your station in life at the point you're now at, I see that we are indeed
trapped in a tyranny of corporate power, lies, and codependence. Taking
nice sunny trips in the hills or sailing across the bay feels good, but
you have to come back to depending on a corrupted and controlling power
structure after the 'vacation.' And all the products, practically, you
took along came from that power, that structure. Rather than admit the
painfully obvious fact you're heavily dependent on the controllers, the
shapers, the power brokers, and all they provide for your sustenance, you
instead have preferred to argue about it. You want me to believe you've
escaped, and have cherry picked out what you need, disposed of all the
rest, and have empowered and liberated yourself. Turn off the monitor,
disconnect the internet, salvage the hardware and software, and be truly
liberated from corporate codependence!!! Go ahead...get away from all of
it. Purchase a remote piece of land and set up a shack and carry in the
water, use wood for heat, etc. Be truly liberated from so much dependence.
Then you can have an effective argument. As long as you keep cherry
pickin', kid, you're fooling yourself. When you're younger, it's easier
not to have to face up to yourself. It's much easier to focus on 'the
bunny hoppers' and experience a sort of surreality for a period of time,
in which you think you're facing up to reality, but then, if you're smart,
later on you realize it was a rather fantastical paradigm you'd fashioned
for your convenience.
Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks

Post by Docrodile
to keep going in this
direction, this pathway that's been made for us, and accepted by us. We
didn't make the pathway. Greedy powerful people were allowed to

construct

Post by Docrodile
the paradigm we complacently accepted.

I'm ok with some company making something that I can buy
which makes my life easier. Personally, I feel more entrapped
by daily chores than anything else.

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.

Yeah, Perseid, you're right We CAN and DO, to some limited degree,

control

Post by Docrodile
the products and services we use. But, then, realistically, how many
people are going to do this? Enough that the entire structure is no

longer

Post by Docrodile
one of co-dependence, and we just begin to be our own manufacturers of
things we need, service we need?

Again, I have no complaints about some company making a profit
by making something useful that I might want to buy.

And how much stuff is that, Perseid? C'mon, how many things do you DIY,
guy? Give me more details...it'd be better for you in the long run if you
just face up to your heavy dependence, your habit, on sucking on that ol'
BIG TIT just like everyone does. And you might take a hard
self-examination as to why you're trying to fool ol' Doc...or yourself, or
others here. I know you've bought into the popular trend of yuppie types
(not saying you're one) who buy Mother Jones magazine, read Backpacker
magazine, ride a mountain bike around, etc...it's more hedonism and
narcissism, repackaged, than it is individualism, independence,
rebellion...and the corporate guys know this, and do a decent job of
feeding into those folks' collective delusions. It's not easy to accept
what I've said. I know. I didn't like it, either. But, if you were living
on the edge of death at any moment, or great disability at any moment, as
I now do, the delusions and illusions begin to fall to wayside, making way
for some uncomfortable self-realization.
It's fun to poke away at the powers-to-be, and I will until the end, and
cherry pick my rebellion, but I recognize the hypocrisy in myself and many
others these days, and understand why the things I've said produce the
usual reactions they do. No one really likes to admit altruism isn't one
of their dedicated qualities.I would've said much the same things as you
have, and I have said those things many times and argued them against all
opposition. We have this insufferable compex ego system that vexes us,
subverts our reality, and sets into motion all kinds of unneeded conflict,
with ourselves, others, and the paradigm we live in. Ultimately, toward
the end of each of our lives, comes some painful revelation of truth and
fiction, thank god, finally, (LOL!) whether it be on our hospice bed, or
wherever. We may choose to say nothing, and quietly slip away with that
revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could call that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks

Post by Docrodile
Again, it's a nice utopian-esque thought

[mukyuk]

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).

It all distills down into dependence on someone to live our lives. We

can

Post by Docrodile
give up being dependent on someone, but who survives as an island? How
many can you count that you know who do? Realistically, we all depend on
someone to do something for us, or provide a product...yeah, we COULD
produce everything ourselves, each and every one of us, independently of
each other, but that isn't going to be our reality, nor has it been

since

Post by Docrodile
civilization dawned. Let's look at the hard reality of our lives. We are
trapped by powers that we don't want to risk throwing off, and content
(with antidepressants, toys, narcissism, et al)

You don't have to live with daily doses of non-prescription drugs.
You don't have to watch tv ads. You don't have to buy toys which
feed your ego. In short, if you feel trapped by this socio-economic
structure, it's because you've allowed yourself to becomed trapped
by it.
Try going for a hike in the mountains every other day. Read a
good book, learn a new language, expand your mind and horizon.
Break out of the entrapment. Take control.

Sounds like a speech to the Sierra Club... LOL! (I think you forget my age
and I'm well educated, and have experienced many things.)
When you get your backpack on, where did you get it from? Water bottle?
Clothes? Shoes? Underwear? Toothpaste and brush? Munchies? If you get a
headache, where did the aspirin or acetaminophen (etc) come from?
Transportation to the starting point for the 'breakaway freedom hike' --
where did the transporatation come from? The gas for it? The bicycle?
No, we don't have to do 'anything' that is the standard consumer
lifestyle -- that's true. We don't HAVE to. You're right. And, I
reiterate -- how many will choose to accept the easiest, most convenient
path? Most. And how will your rebellion, your resistance, change the
paradigm if you continue to rely heavily on the creators of it, and what
they provide? Cherry picking in your lifestyle, while remaining largely
codependent on the corporate TIT, isn't an expansion of anything
liberating -- it's a resignation, a denial, a delusion that you're moving
beyond 'the masses' into some freewheeling world of DIY, rugged
individualism, iconoclastic trail-blazing.
You might as well be a prisoner in a state institution and fantasize that
the spiritual and intellectual exercises have 'liberated' you from the
prison's electric fences and guards. And, in a way, you'd be right. Your
mind can be liberated, to be sure, but the body remains imprisoned. So, if
you're talking philosophical liberation, I can agree. But, that isn't what
you're talking about, really, is it? And the fact you're pushing it down
here, pretty hard, now is a good indication that what I said is bothering
you. From my perspective, Perseid, which I suspect is quite different from
your station in life at the point you're now at, I see that we are indeed
trapped in a tyranny of corporate power, lies, and codependence. Taking
nice sunny trips in the hills or sailing across the bay feels good, but
you have to come back to depending on a corrupted and controlling power
structure after the 'vacation.' And all the products, practically, you
took along came from that power, that structure. Rather than admit the
painfully obvious fact you're heavily dependent on the controllers, the
shapers, the power brokers, and all they provide for your sustenance, you
instead have preferred to argue about it. You want me to believe you've
escaped, and have cherry picked out what you need, disposed of all the
rest, and have empowered and liberated yourself. Turn off the monitor,
disconnect the internet, salvage the hardware and software, and be truly
liberated from corporate codependence!!! Go ahead...get away from all of
it. Purchase a remote piece of land and set up a shack and carry in the
water, use wood for heat, etc. Be truly liberated from so much dependence.
Then you can have an effective argument. As long as you keep cherry
pickin', kid, you're fooling yourself. When you're younger, it's easier
not to have to face up to yourself. It's much easier to focus on 'the
bunny hoppers' and experience a sort of surreality for a period of time,
in which you think you're facing up to reality, but then, if you're smart,
later on you realize it was a rather fantastical paradigm you'd fashioned
for your convenience.
Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks

Post by Docrodile
to keep going in this
direction, this pathway that's been made for us, and accepted by us. We
didn't make the pathway. Greedy powerful people were allowed to

construct

Post by Docrodile
the paradigm we complacently accepted.

I'm ok with some company making something that I can buy
which makes my life easier. Personally, I feel more entrapped
by daily chores than anything else.

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.

Yeah, Perseid, you're right We CAN and DO, to some limited degree,

control

Post by Docrodile
the products and services we use. But, then, realistically, how many
people are going to do this? Enough that the entire structure is no

longer

Post by Docrodile
one of co-dependence, and we just begin to be our own manufacturers of
things we need, service we need?

Again, I have no complaints about some company making a profit
by making something useful that I might want to buy.

And how much stuff is that, Perseid? C'mon, how many things do you DIY,
guy? Give me more details...it'd be better for you in the long run if you
just face up to your heavy dependence, your habit, on sucking on that ol'
BIG TIT just like everyone does. And you might take a hard
self-examination as to why you're trying to fool ol' Doc...or yourself, or
others here. I know you've bought into the popular trend of yuppie types
(not saying you're one) who buy Mother Jones magazine, read Backpacker
magazine, ride a mountain bike around, etc...it's more hedonism and
narcissism, repackaged, than it is individualism, independence,
rebellion...and the corporate guys know this, and do a decent job of
feeding into those folks' collective delusions. It's not easy to accept
what I've said. I know. I didn't like it, either. But, if you were living
on the edge of death at any moment, or great disability at any moment, as
I now do, the delusions and illusions begin to fall to wayside, making way
for some uncomfortable self-realization.
It's fun to poke away at the powers-to-be, and I will until the end, and
cherry pick my rebellion, but I recognize the hypocrisy in myself and many
others these days, and understand why the things I've said produce the
usual reactions they do. No one really likes to admit altruism isn't one
of their dedicated qualities.I would've said much the same things as you
have, and I have said those things many times and argued them against all
opposition. We have this insufferable compex ego system that vexes us,
subverts our reality, and sets into motion all kinds of unneeded conflict,
with ourselves, others, and the paradigm we live in. Ultimately, toward
the end of each of our lives, comes some painful revelation of truth and
fiction, thank god, finally, (LOL!) whether it be on our hospice bed, or
wherever. We may choose to say nothing, and quietly slip away with that
revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could call that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

Not only all, that but the computer has basically taken over all our lives.
Just look at us!!

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks

Post by Docrodile
Again, it's a nice utopian-esque thought

[Steven Douglas]

Post by mukyuk

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
I think we're sucking on multiple tits every day, which are
linked to one much larger tit, the federal government... but since
we the people ARE the federal government, we are effectively sucking
on our OWN tits (I'm trying to keep a straight face after having
said that).

It all distills down into dependence on someone to live our lives. We

can

Post by Docrodile
give up being dependent on someone, but who survives as an island? How
many can you count that you know who do? Realistically, we all depend on
someone to do something forus, or provide a product...yeah, we COULD
produce everything ourselves, each and every one ofus, independently of
each other, but that isn't going to be our reality, nor has it been

since

Post by Docrodile
civilization dawned. Let'slookat the hard reality of our lives. We are
trapped by powers that we don't want to risk throwing off, and content
(with antidepressants, toys, narcissism, et al)

You don't have to live with daily doses of non-prescription drugs.
You don't have to watch tv ads. You don't have to buy toys which
feed your ego. In short, if you feel trapped by this socio-economic
structure, it's because you've allowed yourself to becomed trapped
by it.
Try going for a hike in the mountains every other day. Read a
good book, learn a new language, expand your mind and horizon.
Break out of the entrapment. Take control.

Sounds like a speech to the Sierra Club... LOL! (I think you forget my age
and I'm well educated, and have experienced many things.)
When you get your backpack on, where did you get it from? Water bottle?
Clothes? Shoes? Underwear? Toothpaste and brush? Munchies? If you get a
headache, where did the aspirin or acetaminophen (etc) come from?
Transportation to the starting point for the 'breakaway freedom hike' --
where did the transporatation come from? The gas for it? The bicycle?
No, we don't have to do 'anything' that is the standard consumer
lifestyle -- that's true. We don't HAVE to. You're right. And, I
reiterate -- how many will choose to accept the easiest, most convenient
path? Most. And how will your rebellion, your resistance, change the
paradigm if you continue to rely heavily on the creators of it, and what
they provide? Cherry picking in your lifestyle, while remaining largely
codependent on the corporate TIT, isn't an expansion of anything
liberating -- it's a resignation, a denial, a delusion that you're moving
beyond 'the masses' into some freewheeling world of DIY, rugged
individualism, iconoclastic trail-blazing.
You might as well be a prisoner in a state institution and fantasize that
the spiritual and intellectual exercises have 'liberated' you from the
prison's electric fences and guards. And, in a way, you'd be right. Your
mind can be liberated, to be sure, but the body remains imprisoned. So, if
you're talking philosophical liberation, I can agree. But, that isn't what
you're talking about, really, is it? And the fact you're pushing it down
here, pretty hard, now is a good indication that what I said is bothering
you. From my perspective, Perseid, which I suspect is quite different from
your station in life at the point you're now at, I see that we are indeed
trapped in a tyranny of corporate power, lies, and codependence. Taking
nice sunny trips in the hills or sailing across the bay feels good, but
you have to come back to depending on a corrupted and controlling power
structure after the 'vacation.' And all the products, practically, you
took along came from that power, that structure. Rather than admit the
painfully obvious fact you're heavily dependent on the controllers, the
shapers, the power brokers, and all they provide for your sustenance, you
instead have preferred to argue about it. You want me to believe you've
escaped, and have cherry picked out what you need, disposed of all the
rest, and have empowered and liberated yourself. Turn off the monitor,
disconnect the internet, salvage the hardware and software, and be truly
liberated from corporate codependence!!! Go ahead...get away from all of
it. Purchase a remote piece of land and set up a shack and carry in the
water, use wood for heat, etc. Be truly liberated from so much dependence.
Then you can have an effective argument. As long as you keep cherry
pickin', kid, you're fooling yourself. When you're younger, it's easier
not to have to face up to yourself. It's much easier to focus on 'the
bunny hoppers' and experience a sort of surreality for a period of time,
in which you think you're facing up to reality, but then, if you're smart,
later on you realize it was a rather fantastical paradigm you'd fashioned
for your convenience.
Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks

Post by Docrodile
to keep going in this
direction, this pathway that's been made forus, and accepted byus. We
didn't make the pathway. Greedy powerful people were allowed to

construct

Post by Docrodile
the paradigm we complacently accepted.

I'm ok with some company making something that I can buy
which makes my life easier. Personally, I feel more entrapped
by daily chores than anything else.

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
We control our environments in very subtle ways... don't buy
certain products and the product stops getting made and we
don't see it any more... don't respond to certain types of
ads then the ads go away because they're ineffective.

Yeah, Perseid, you're right We CAN and DO, to some limited degree,

control

Post by Docrodile
the products and services we use. But, then, realistically, how many
people are going to do this? Enough that the entire structure is no

longer

Post by Docrodile
one of co-dependence, and we just begin to be our own manufacturers of
things we need, service we need?

Again, I have no complaints about some company making a profit
by making something useful that I might want to buy.

And how much stuff is that, Perseid? C'mon, how many things do you DIY,
guy? Give me more details...it'd be better for you in the long run if you
just face up to your heavy dependence, your habit, on sucking on that ol'
BIG TIT just like everyone does. And you might take a hard
self-examination as to why you're trying to fool ol' Doc...or yourself, or
others here. I know you've bought into the popular trend of yuppie types
(not saying you're one) who buy Mother Jones magazine, read Backpacker
magazine, ride a mountain bike around, etc...it's more hedonism and
narcissism, repackaged, than it is individualism, independence,
rebellion...and the corporate guys know this, and do a decent job of
feeding into those folks' collective delusions. It's not easy to accept
what I've said. I know. I didn't like it, either. But, if you were living
on the edge of death at any moment, or great disability at any moment, as
I now do, the delusions and illusions begin to fall to wayside, making way
for some uncomfortable self-realization.
It's fun to poke away at the powers-to-be, and I will until the end, and
cherry pick my rebellion, but I recognize the hypocrisy in myself and many
others these days, and understand why the things I've said produce the
usual reactions they do. No one really likes to admit altruism isn't one
of their dedicated qualities.I would've said much the same things as you
have, and I have said those things many times and argued them against all
opposition. We have this insufferable compex ego system that vexesus,
subverts our reality, and sets into motion all kinds of unneeded conflict,
with ourselves, others, and the paradigm we live in. Ultimately, toward
the end of each of our lives, comes some painful revelation of truth and
fiction, thank god, finally, (LOL!) whether it be on our hospice bed, or
wherever. We may choose to say nothing, and quietly slip away with that
revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could call that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

Not only all, that but the computer has basically taken over all our lives.
Justlookatus!!

Your computer HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?

[Werewolfy]

On Jan 27, 5:12?pm, "Steven Douglas" <***@flashmail.com> wrote:
HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?


It's nicer than people, Stevie.
Perhaps Mondo feels the same way...I don't know. Lifestyle changes all
of the time. Computers have made quite a difference to the way we
live. Private transport made an even larger difference to Society.

All we need now is to form a 'World Government'. After that we can
unite and elect a 'God'..or perhaps abstain.
It would be an interesting ballot paper. Put your X against a choice
from the candidates..Zeus, Odin, Jesus, Jesus's Dad, Jesus's mum (for
the feminist brigade) Mohammed, Buddha, Allah, The Sun, The Moon,
Shivna or any one of those Hindu deities, Isis, ohhh...hundreds of
them.
Trust in democracy I say!

Werewolfy

[Docrodile]

Post by Steven Douglas
HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?
It's nicer than people, Stevie.
Perhaps Mondo feels the same way...I don't know. Lifestyle changes all
of the time. Computers have made quite a difference to the way we
live. Private transport made an even larger difference to Society.
All we need now is to form a 'World Government'. After that we can
unite and elect a 'God'..or perhaps abstain.
It would be an interesting ballot paper. Put your X against a choice
from the candidates..Zeus, Odin, Jesus, Jesus's Dad, Jesus's mum (for
the feminist brigade) Mohammed, Buddha, Allah, The Sun, The Moon,
Shivna or any one of those Hindu deities, Isis, ohhh...hundreds of
them.
Trust in democracy I say!
Werewolfy

Some day Jesus himself might be online, answering questions and fulfilling
prayers!
And the antichrist may get online before he sends the world into a fiery
holocaust!
Reincarnated avatars might be clicking the mouse, too, like Buddha or
Krishna.
What do you think, Wolfy?
Docrodile

[Charly the Bastard]

Post by Steven Douglas
HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?
It's nicer than people, Stevie.
Perhaps Mondo feels the same way...I don't know. Lifestyle changes all
of the time. Computers have made quite a difference to the way we
live. Private transport made an even larger difference to Society.
All we need now is to form a 'World Government'. After that we can
unite and elect a 'God'..or perhaps abstain.
It would be an interesting ballot paper. Put your X against a choice
from the candidates..Zeus, Odin, Jesus, Jesus's Dad, Jesus's mum (for
the feminist brigade) Mohammed, Buddha, Allah, The Sun, The Moon,
Shivna or any one of those Hindu deities, Isis, ohhh...hundreds of
them.
Trust in democracy I say!
Werewolfy

Vulcan, god of the forge! At least we manage to make things during our
worship services. And it's very theraputic; lifting weights in a sauna and
beating the crap out of hot metal with a big hammer. Watch all those petty
frustrations of the day melt away. Nagging wife? WHAM! Anal boss? WHAM!
Traffic jam? WHAM! Join today; no experience or credit check required.
Professional training available free of charge. I feel much better now...

Charly

[Docrodile]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by mukyuk

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could call that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

Not only all, that but the computer has basically taken over all our lives.
Justlookatus!!

Your computer HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?

What skin did you lose off your Jesus-lovin' ass if he spends a lot of
time online? Clue you in, Stevie -- many are disabled people, others work
online and make a living, still others find personal fulfillment in the
many friends they make online. Others like the games and the shopping,
while others LIKE TO ARGUE AND SPEND LARGE AMOUNTS OF TIME DIGGING THROUGH
ARCHIVES TO SUPPORT THEIR ARGUMENTS.
And what is so great about the world out there? Heavy traffic, crazy
drivers, rude kids, long lines, high prices...in fact, that's what many
futurists had been predicting for years that people would work, play,
communicate, shop, etc., at home some day. Saves energy! And that day has
pretty much arrived.
Try to keep up with times, Steve-O...
Docrodile

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by mukyuk

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could call that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

Not only all, that but the computer has basically taken over all our lives.
Justlookatus!!

Your computer HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?

What skin did you lose off your Jesus-lovin' ass if he spends a lot of
time online?

Well, Mr. Bigot, as I've mentioned to mukyuk in the past, spending too
much time online can cause one to feel depressed. I'm sure in your
infinite wisdom you've heard of those studies -- but for those who
haven't, here's an article about it:

August 30, 1998
Web posted at: 6:47 p.m. EDT (2247 GMT)

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Internet users who spend even a few hours a week
online at home experience higher levels of depression and loneliness
than if they had used the computer network less frequently, The New
York Times reported Sunday.

The result of the two-year study by Carnegie Mellon University on the
social and psychological effects of Internet use at home surprised
both researchers and sponsors, which included Intel Corp., Hewlett
Packard, AT&T Research and Apple Computer.

"We were shocked by the findings, because they are counterintuitive to
what we know about how socially the Internet is being used," Robert
Kraut, a social psychology professor at Carnegie Mellon's Human
Computer Interaction Institute, told the newspaper. "We are not
talking here about the extremes. These were normal adults and their
families, and on average, for those who used the Internet most, things
got worse," he said.

Even though participants in the study used inherently social features
such as e-mail and chat rooms, they observed a decline in interaction
with family members and a reduction in their circles of friends that
directly corresponded to the amount of time they spent online, the
Times reported.

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9808/30/cyberstudy/

[Docrodile]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by mukyuk

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could call that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

Not only all, that but the computer has basically taken over all our lives.
Justlookatus!!

Your computer HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?

What skin did you lose off your Jesus-lovin' ass if he spends a lot of
time online?

Well, Mr. Bigot, as I've mentioned to mukyuk in the past, spending too
much time online can cause one to feel depressed. I'm sure in your
infinite wisdom you've heard of those studies -- but for those who

Well, Professor Stevie, I know about the numerous studies done on internet
life. It seems clear to me that the internet continues to grow in
popularity and influences many vital parts of our daily lives. Futurists
years ago had predicted that electronic lifestyles would become
increasingly important and popular, to which I say, "So what?" The
adaptability of the human creature is extensive, and, for better or worse,
it will incorporate new forms of communication, work, play, commerce,
etc., using the internet in all its forms (branching into mobile phone
tech). Christians always rail against the rather sudden and massive social
changes, and become apprehensive, with some moving toward repression and
oppression of the new lifestyle. You can look back in the archives and
find stories and studies on the religious community's overreactions to
such emerging technologies as radio, tv, telephones, electricity,
automobiles, airplanes, space travel, etc. Their concerns gave way
inevitably to an acceptance and assimiliation of these new ways of living,
working, interrelationships, etc., by the great majority of
social/religious/political 'hold outs' originally opposed to such changes.
So, it is not unusual for a backward-ass christian like yourself to think
there is something sinister, something wrong, something detrimental about
the internet. All this new venue is doing is reflecting the same old human
behavior as before -- that many use it to their advantage, while some use
it to exploit, hurt, harass, etc., and still others adopt it as a total
lifestyle. You and the social scientists can make your judgements, and
sound the alarms, and attempt censorship or repression, but humans will
override such concerns generally and adapt to the new lifestyles, and use
them as they see fit, whether you and your evangelical buddies like it or
not.
Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas
August 30, 1998
Web posted at: 6:47 p.m. EDT (2247 GMT)
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Internet users who spend even a few hours a week
online at home experience higher levels of depression and loneliness
than if they had used the computer network less frequently, The New
York Times reported Sunday.
The result of the two-year study by Carnegie Mellon University on the
social and psychological effects of Internet use at home surprised
both researchers and sponsors, which included Intel Corp., Hewlett
Packard, AT&T Research and Apple Computer.
"We were shocked by the findings, because they are counterintuitive to
what we know about how socially the Internet is being used," Robert
Kraut, a social psychology professor at Carnegie Mellon's Human
Computer Interaction Institute, told the newspaper. "We are not
talking here about the extremes. These were normal adults and their
families, and on average, for those who used the Internet most, things
got worse," he said.
Even though participants in the study used inherently social features
such as e-mail and chat rooms, they observed a decline in interaction
with family members and a reduction in their circles of friends that
directly corresponded to the amount of time they spent online, the
Times reported.
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9808/30/cyberstudy/

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by mukyuk

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could call that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

Not only all, that but the computer has basically taken over all our lives.
Justlookatus!!

Your computer HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?

What skin did you lose off your Jesus-lovin' ass if he spends a lot of
time online?

Well, Mr. Bigot, as I've mentioned to mukyuk in the past, spending too
much time online can cause one to feel depressed. I'm sure in your
infinite wisdom you've heard of those studies -- but for those who

Well, Professor Stevie, I know about the numerous studies done on internet
life. It seems clear to me that the internet continues to grow in
popularity and influences many vital parts of our daily lives. Futurists
years ago had predicted that electronic lifestyles would become
increasingly important and popular, to which I say, "So what?" The
adaptability of the human creature is extensive, and, for better or worse,
it will incorporate new forms of communication, work, play, commerce,
etc., using the internet in all its forms (branching into mobile phone
tech). Christians always rail against the rather sudden and massive social
changes, and become apprehensive, with some moving toward repression and
oppression of the new lifestyle. You can look back in the archives and
find stories and studies on the religious community's overreactions to
such emerging technologies as radio, tv, telephones, electricity,
automobiles, airplanes, space travel, etc. Their concerns gave way
inevitably to an acceptance and assimiliation of these new ways of living,
working, interrelationships, etc., by the great majority of
social/religious/political 'hold outs' originally opposed to such changes.
So, it is not unusual for a backward-ass christian like yourself to think
there is something sinister, something wrong, something detrimental about
the internet.

Where did I say there was something sinister, wrong, or detrimental
about the internet, you arrogant pompous windbag? And where have I
made my Christianity an issue in any of my discussions with you, you
arrogant pompous windbag?

[Werewolfy]

On Jan 28, 8:34?pm, "Steven Douglas" <***@flashmail.com> wrote:
Where did I say there was something sinister, wrong, or detrimental

Post by Steven Douglas
about the internet, you arrogant pompous windbag? And where have I
made my Christianity an issue in any of my discussions with you, you
arrogant pompous windbag?-

Steve, If you write a post such as you did;
"Your computer HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?"

I see nothing very Christian, nor anything nice there. I do see those
very character faults that you (doubly) ascribe to Croco. I see
arrogance and pomposity. The words were chosen for an effect of
'sinister', 'wrong', 'detrimental'.
Are you going to try to tell us that you were being polite and just
passing the time with a general enquiry?
If you are, I don't believe too many will take much notice of your
words.

Werewolfy

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Steven Douglas
Where did I say there was something sinister, wrong, or detrimental

Post by Steven Douglas
about the internet, you arrogant pompous windbag? And where have I
made my Christianity an issue in any of my discussions with you, you
arrogant pompous windbag?

-Steve, If you write a post such as you did;
"Your computer HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?"
I see nothing very Christian, nor anything nice there. I do see those
very character faults that you (doubly) ascribe to Croco. I see
arrogance and pomposity. The words were chosen for an effect of
'sinister', 'wrong', 'detrimental'.

It goes back to a prior discussion with another poster (not Doc), who
told of his depression. I told him at the time it might be a good idea
to take a break from the computer, and he agreed.

Post by Steven Douglas
Are you going to try to tell us that you were being polite and just
passing the time with a general enquiry?

Not entirely, and you're right -- I shouldn't have sounded so
confrontational. What do you know, maybe I'm human after all? I'm not
perfect, and I have acknowledge that recently. I am not the epitome of
what a Christian should be. But I do try -- you should see some of the
things I type and then delete ... no, on second thought, you shouldn't
(which is why I delete them).

[Werewolfy]

On Jan 29, 1:31?am, "Steven Douglas"
Not entirely, and you're right -- I shouldn't have sounded so

Post by Steven Douglas
confrontational. What do you know, maybe I'm human after all? I'm not
perfect, and I have acknowledge that recently. I am not the epitome of
what a Christian should be. But I do try -- you should see some of the
things I type and then delete ... no, on second thought, you shouldn't
(which is why I delete them).

Fair enough answer. Thanks.
I've been known to delete too..I try to conceal the more murderous
ideas!

Werewolfy

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Werewolfy
On Jan 29, 1:31?am, "Steven Douglas"

Post by Steven Douglas
Not entirely, and you're right -- I shouldn't have sounded so
confrontational. What do you know, maybe I'm human after all? I'm not
perfect, and I have acknowledge that recently. I am not the epitome of
what a Christian should be. But I do try -- you should see some of the
things I type and then delete ... no, on second thought, you shouldn't
(which is why I delete them).

Fair enough answer. Thanks.
I've been known to delete too..I try to conceal the more murderous
ideas!

Well, I don't take it quite that far. The only murderous thoughts I
ever have are for truly evil people, such as the leaders of the
Islamic Republic of Sudan (just for example). By the way, I noticed
your reponse to JTEM in another thread. You know, if the United States
was really all about world domination, don't you think we could have
owned the world after World War II? Instead, after occupying Japan for
several years, we gave them their independence. We returned Okinawa to
Japan, though no one made us do it. We have no intention of owning
Iraq. If we did, why would we have allowed them to have sovereign
elections?

And don't forget, your country was right there with us. The old
British Empire had a history of world domination, didn't they?

[Werewolfy]

On Jan 29, 2:03?pm, "Steven Douglas" > And don't forget, your country
was right there with us. The old

Post by Steven Douglas
British Empire had a history of world domination, didn't they?

Oh yes, they certainly did. It was however, a benign Empire. They
exploited certainly, but the idea was always to return power to the
occupied Country. More than an idea actually, a reality. One by one,
power and independence was restored, in favour of a 'commonwealth' of
Nations. You would find the children of rich Indians for example, sent
to prestigious public schools, such as Eton, in order to arrive at an
'English' standard, suitable to govern their land.

Do you have many Iraqi's in American Universities , sent specifically
to learn about fair Government?

The British Empire had many faults, but domination was never one of
them.

Werewolfy

[Woodswun]

Post by Werewolfy
On Jan 29, 2:03?pm, "Steven Douglas" > And don't forget, your country
was right there with us. The old

Post by Steven Douglas
British Empire had a history of world domination, didn't they?

Oh yes, they certainly did. It was however, a benign Empire. They
exploited certainly, but the idea was always to return power to the
occupied Country. More than an idea actually, a reality. One by one,
power and independence was restored, in favour of a 'commonwealth' of
Nations. You would find the children of rich Indians for example, sent
to prestigious public schools, such as Eton, in order to arrive at an
'English' standard, suitable to govern their land.
Do you have many Iraqi's in American Universities , sent specifically
to learn about fair Government?
The British Empire had many faults, but domination was never one of
them.
Werewolfy

Um ... I would say that forcing Muslims out of India, deliberately
addicting the Chinese to opium, and forcing Indians to work in South
Africa was pretty dominating, Ricky.

Woods

[Werewolfy]

On Jan 30, 2:07?am, Woodswun <***@tepidmail.com> wrote:
I would say that forcing Muslims out of India, deliberately

Post by Woodswun
addicting the Chinese to opium, and forcing Indians to work in South
Africa was pretty dominating, Ricky.

Agreed..but it's a matter of semantics Woodsy. I class those things
under 'exploitation'.

The English military relied heavily on Indian troops, recruited
avidly. It was an odd way of life by today's standards...But the
Indian people didn't object a great deal to it. Many profited by our
presence, and order was established amongst numerous waring parties.
To be the same, you need to recruit Iraqi's from Baghdad directly into
the US army, you need to hand over control of regions, towns etc to an
appointed authority. You need to stop intefering in local disputes and
allow them to 'settle;' matter for themselves.
Many Indians didn't really want to see the end of English rule, and
the Country remains with 'Commonwealth' ties...a concept of Nations
that the US has never considered.

You mention opium. Of course, people think of the drug today in a 21st
century manner. At the time it had a very different image. It was
fashionable and legal. Indeed, any attempt to control the drug would
have resulted in major civilian unrest.

No, it wasn't perfect..of course not. But, unlike the Roman Empire,
British Colonialism was just that..a temporary affair.
Let Bush and his oil investors find a way to be allowed to keep Iraq
forever, and I don't doubt that they would grasp the opportunity with
relish.

That's the difference.

If you fancy a more recent example, then Hong Kong springs to mind.
The majority of Chinese were very sad when Britain honoured her old
timetable commitment, and returned the Province to China.
I can't imagine Bush and his friends 'giving away' a financial
treasure like Hong Kong....Some reason would be found to retain the
place under US domination.

Werewolfy?

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Woodswun
I would say that forcing Muslims out of India, deliberately

Post by Woodswun
addicting the Chinese to opium, and forcing Indians to work in South
Africa was pretty dominating, Ricky.

Agreed..but it's a matter of semantics Woodsy. I class those things
under 'exploitation'.
The English military relied heavily on Indian troops, recruited
avidly. It was an odd way of life by today's standards...But the
Indian people didn't object a great deal to it. Many profited by our
presence, and order was established amongst numerous waring parties.
To be the same, you need to recruit Iraqi's from Baghdad directly into
the US army,

Iraq is already a sovereign nation. If we were recruiting Iraqis
directly into the US Army, your assumption that we are an occupier
would be correct. Instead, the objective has been to get Iraq on its
feet as a sovereign nation. And by the way, don't forget your nation
was right there with us every step of the way.

Post by Woodswun
you need to hand over control of regions, towns etc to an
appointed authority.

Not appointed, elected -- by the Iraqi people.

Post by Woodswun
You need to stop intefering in local disputes and
allow them to 'settle;' matter for themselves.
Many Indians didn't really want to see the end of English rule, and
the Country remains with 'Commonwealth' ties...a concept of Nations
that the US has never considered.
You mention opium. Of course, people think of the drug today in a 21st
century manner. At the time it had a very different image. It was
fashionable and legal. Indeed, any attempt to control the drug would
have resulted in major civilian unrest.
No, it wasn't perfect..of course not. But, unlike the Roman Empire,
British Colonialism was just that..a temporary affair.
Let Bush and his oil investors find a way to be allowed to keep Iraq
forever, and I don't doubt that they would grasp the opportunity with
relish.
That's the difference.
If you fancy a more recent example, then Hong Kong springs to mind.
The majority of Chinese were very sad when Britain honoured her old
timetable commitment, and returned the Province to China.
I can't imagine Bush and his friends 'giving away' a financial
treasure like Hong Kong....Some reason would be found to retain the
place under US domination.

Is there some historical precedent that would confirm your argument?

[Werewolfy]

On Jan 30, 2:24?pm, "Steven Douglas"

"And by the way, don't forget your nation was right there with us
every step of the way."

Yes, we did take part, didn't we. Mr Blair knows that too. He also
knows he is soon to lose his job because of his participation
Steven, The British public en-masse do not, and never have supported
this war.
Today, we, the ordinary people of the land, must abide by the strategy
of our elected leaders.
Tomorrow, there will be a new set of leaders. Ones who are more in
touch with the people.
You are so wrong. The British Nation was NOT with you for one inch of
the way. The Government decided...now the Government regrets.

"Is there some historical precedent that would confirm your argument?"

No idea. I don't use reference books to research a thing. Look it up,
if that pleases you.

Werewolfy

[Docrodile]

Post by Werewolfy
On Jan 30, 2:24?pm, "Steven Douglas"
"And by the way, don't forget your nation was right there with us
every step of the way."
Yes, we did take part, didn't we. Mr Blair knows that too. He also
knows he is soon to lose his job because of his participation
Steven, The British public en-masse do not, and never have supported
this war.
Today, we, the ordinary people of the land, must abide by the strategy
of our elected leaders.
Tomorrow, there will be a new set of leaders. Ones who are more in
touch with the people.
You are so wrong. The British Nation was NOT with you for one inch of
the way. The Government decided...now the Government regrets.
"Is there some historical precedent that would confirm your argument?"
No idea. I don't use reference books to research a thing. Look it up,
if that pleases you.
Werewolfy

Whew! Good answer. The only one that keeps the neocon spider crawling off
to another potential victim.
Docrodile

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Werewolfy
On Jan 30, 2:24?pm, "Steven Douglas"
"And by the way, don't forget your nation was right there with us
every step of the way."
Yes, we did take part, didn't we. Mr Blair knows that too. He also
knows he is soon to lose his job because of his participation
Steven, The British public en-masse do not, and never have supported
this war.
Today, we, the ordinary people of the land, must abide by the strategy
of our elected leaders.
Tomorrow, there will be a new set of leaders. Ones who are more in
touch with the people.
You are so wrong. The British Nation was NOT with you for one inch of
the way. The Government decided...now the Government regrets.

Can you show a quote where Blair has stated his regrets?

Post by Werewolfy
"Is there some historical precedent that would confirm your argument?"
No idea. I don't use reference books to research a thing. Look it up,
if that pleases you.

Well, I was wondering if you had some actual specific example to apply
to your conclusion that the US would not have let Hong Kong go the way
the UK did. Otherwise, there is nothing to look up, because there is
no example that would back up your argument.

[Docrodile]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Woodswun
I would say that forcing Muslims out of India, deliberately

Post by Woodswun
addicting the Chinese to opium, and forcing Indians to work in South
Africa was pretty dominating, Ricky.

Agreed..but it's a matter of semantics Woodsy. I class those things
under 'exploitation'.
The English military relied heavily on Indian troops, recruited
avidly. It was an odd way of life by today's standards...But the
Indian people didn't object a great deal to it. Many profited by our
presence, and order was established amongst numerous waring parties.
To be the same, you need to recruit Iraqi's from Baghdad directly into
the US army,

Iraq is already a sovereign nation. If we were recruiting Iraqis
directly into the US Army, your assumption that we are an occupier
would be correct. Instead, the objective has been to get Iraq on its
feet as a sovereign nation. And by the way, don't forget your nation
was right there with us every step of the way.

LOL!! Iraq was already 'on its feet' -- the US preemptive invasion knocked
it off its feet. And with 12 years of harsh sanctions hurting its people
more than its goverment, they were in a suffering situation before they
got bombed all to hell.

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Woodswun
you need to hand over control of regions, towns etc to an
appointed authority.

Not appointed, elected -- by the Iraqi people.

The type of government wasn't chosen -- it was forced upon them. They have
a sovereign right to choose whatever form of government they want.

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Woodswun
You need to stop intefering in local disputes and
allow them to 'settle;' matter for themselves.
Many Indians didn't really want to see the end of English rule, and
the Country remains with 'Commonwealth' ties...a concept of Nations
that the US has never considered.

Is there some historical precedent that would confirm your argument?

Dig into the archives, Wolfy, and satisfy this psycho's obsession with
keeping his sinking boat of support for Bush's failed Iraq policy and
tragic invasion...something like a soothing brain balm for a disturbed man
who can't do one basic right thing -- admit Bush was patently wrong for
invading Iraq. His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly.
Docrodile

[Werewolfy]

On Jan 30, 8:26?pm, "Docrodile" <***@hellsbayou.net> wrote:

"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."


I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around. Whatever it is, the man thankfully
is not representative of the average person in the world. Not even of
the average person in America...No webs for Wolfy though. It isn't
worth the bother.

Werewolfy

[Docrodile]

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around. Whatever it is, the man thankfully
is not representative of the average person in the world. Not even of
the average person in America...No webs for Wolfy though. It isn't
worth the bother.
Werewolfy

Well, IMO it's an extension of his narcissism -- a desire to pull people
into his world, and it truly is more his than his opponents', where people
must exist as librarians, or be ignored by Stevie.
You're wise to stay away from any referencing...it doesn't matter if he
gets someone to "look it up" or not, though. He recreates or reinterprets
the archival references.
I've met only two people in my life that had his mental disorder. I killed
one of 'em, and the other's in a sanitarium.
Docrodile ;)

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.

Did you disagree with the Korean War as well? Would you have condemned
the people of South Korea to living under the horrors of Communism for
all these years?

Post by Werewolfy
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around.

On the contrary, it's not a weight -- it's a lightener of the load.
Ask any believer if they consider the Bible to be an added weight. All
you've done is show your continued misunderstanding of what it is to
be a believer.

[Charly the Bastard]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.

Did you disagree with the Korean War as well? Would you have condemned
the people of South Korea to living under the horrors of Communism for
all these years?

Post by Werewolfy
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around.

On the contrary, it's not a weight -- it's a lightener of the load.
Ask any believer if they consider the Bible to be an added weight. All
you've done is show your continued misunderstanding of what it is to
be a believer.

You're trying to change the subject. That won't fly here. You're busted.

Charly

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.

Did you disagree with the Korean War as well? Would you have condemned
the people of South Korea to living under the horrors of Communism for
all these years?

Post by Werewolfy
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around.

On the contrary, it's not a weight -- it's a lightener of the load.
Ask any believer if they consider the Bible to be an added weight. All
you've done is show your continued misunderstanding of what it is to
be a believer.

You're trying to change the subject. That won't fly here. You're busted.

No, I responded to an incorrect assumption by Wolfy. The original
subject is still open.

[Werewolfy]

Post by Steven Douglas
Did you disagree with the Korean War as well? Would you have condemned
the people of South Korea to living under the horrors of Communism for
all these years?

I thought Macarthy died? Are there still 'Reds under the beds' Stevie?

You write 'The horrors of communism' and I see the Great American
Witch-Hunt all over again.
Would I 'Condemn' the people of S Korea to living as Communists?

What the Hell has it got to do with me. Let your Macarthy brigade
oppose Communism. I couldn't care less.

Those lines that I reproduce from you above, they say so much about
you. Were I a savage in a jungle, living a happy but simple
life...well, you would come along and 'enlighten' me with your old
book and fairy stories. You would even believe that it 'was for my own
good'. Of course, whilst all of this 'goodness' was going on, you and
your like would be busy chopping down my trees and digging up my
pretty rocks.

You see yourself as 'a defender'...don't you? Look again. The world
sees you as an aggressor.

Werewolfy

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Werewolfy

Post by Steven Douglas
Did you disagree with the Korean War as well? Would you have condemned
the people of South Korea to living under the horrors of Communism for
all these years?

I thought Macarthy died? Are there still 'Reds under the beds' Stevie?

First of all, Rickie, this "Stevie" thing is really cute -- and quite
original as well. I'm impressed.

Post by Werewolfy
You write 'The horrors of communism' and I see the Great American
Witch-Hunt all over again.

If you don't know the difference between the actual horrors of
Communism under tyrannical dictatorships, and the McCarthy era witch
hunts of the 1950s, allow me to explain the difference for you. First,
let's start with the horrors of Communism in North Korea -- here's
just one example:

[quoting] Revealed: the gas chamber horror of North Korea's gulag

A series of shocking personal testimonies is now shedding light on
Camp 22 - one of the country's most horrific secrets

Antony Barnett
Sunday February 1, 2004
The Observer

In the remote north-eastern corner of North Korea, close to the border
of Russia and China, is Haengyong. Hidden away in the mountains, this
remote town is home to Camp 22 - North Korea's largest concentration
camp, where thousands of men, women and children accused of political
crimes are held.

Now, it is claimed, it is also where thousands die each year and where
prison guards stamp on the necks of babies born to prisoners to kill
them.

Over the past year harrowing first-hand testimonies from North Korean
defectors have detailed execution and torture, and now chilling
evidence has emerged that the walls of Camp 22 hide an even more evil
secret: gas chambers where horrific chemical experiments are conducted
on human beings.

Witnesses have described watching entire families being put in glass
chambers and gassed. They are left to an agonising death while
scientists take notes. The allegations offer the most shocking glimpse
so far of Kim Jong-il's North Korean regime. [end quoting]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,1136483,00.html

This is what the people of South Korea have been spared. Does it
matter to you? The man who was US President at that time, and led the
effort to stop North Korea from taking over South Korea, was Harry S
Truman. He was a political foe of McCarthy. McCarthy's tactics were
wrong. Everyone knows that. But there actually *were* pro-Stalinist
Communists infiltrating the government at the time -- pro-Stalinists
who apparently liked Stalin's gulags and his plans for expansionist
international Communism.

Post by Werewolfy
Would I 'Condemn' the people of S Korea to living as Communists?
What the Hell has it got to do with me. Let your Macarthy brigade
oppose Communism. I couldn't care less.

President Truman, who was a political foe of McCarthy, led the
coalition against Communist expansion into South Korea. As I've
mentioned here previously, I once knew a woman from Korea who was
eternally grateful that he did.

Post by Werewolfy
Those lines that I reproduce from you above, they say so much about
you. Were I a savage in a jungle, living a happy but simple
life...well, you would come along and 'enlighten' me with your old
book and fairy stories.

You have a way of making a Communist tyrannical dicatorship sound so
benign. Do you also think South Vietnam remained perfectly benign
after the Communist takeover in 1975? Maybe you should ask some of the
people who were rounded up and sent to Communist "reeducation" camps.

[Docrodile]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Werewolfy

Post by Steven Douglas
Did you disagree with the Korean War as well? Would you have condemned
the people of South Korea to living under the horrors of Communism for
all these years?

I thought Macarthy died? Are there still 'Reds under the beds' Stevie?

First of all, Rickie, this "Stevie" thing is really cute -- and quite
original as well. I'm impressed.

Post by Werewolfy
You write 'The horrors of communism' and I see the Great American
Witch-Hunt all over again.

If you don't know the difference between the actual horrors of
Communism under tyrannical dictatorships, and the McCarthy era witch
hunts of the 1950s, allow me to explain the difference for you. First,
let's start with the horrors of Communism in North Korea -- here's

Now look at who's being the pompous, know-it-all!! LOL! You hypocrite!!
:)~ Give him some silly lessons, Professor. I'm sure Wolfy would like to
castrate you and I'd be glad to help him. No, I think we should first
force you to run naked down a main highway in the Anbar Province with
'Jesus Saves' painted on your front and back...then we castrate you, if
they haven't beheaded you.

Post by Steven Douglas
[quoting] Revealed: the gas chamber horror of North Korea's gulag

[Werewolfy]

Post by Steven Douglas
You have a way of making a Communist tyrannical dicatorship sound so
benign. Do you also think South Vietnam remained perfectly benign
after the Communist takeover in 1975? Maybe you should ask some of the
people who were rounded up and sent to Communist "reeducation" camps.

Can't say that you Macarthy witch hunt was very nice either.

Been to Vietnam? I was in Ho Chi MIn and Hanoi last year. It's hard to
equate the place with all of that death and destruction. The people
seemed happy enough. That';s more than can be said whilst you were
'medding' and 'preventing' the spread of that awful communism.
Go there now. Look around, ask questions.

Then ask, 'Why did we become involved here. What good did we do. How
can we justify all of the suffering and loss of life?"

Why, you were there to keep the nasty Russians distant from your home
sanctuary. Wouldn't do to let them have Vietnam, would it?

Well, Stevie. Was it worth it?

Werewolfy

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Werewolfy

Post by Steven Douglas
You have a way of making a Communist tyrannical dicatorship sound so
benign. Do you also think South Vietnam remained perfectly benign
after the Communist takeover in 1975? Maybe you should ask some of the
people who were rounded up and sent to Communist "reeducation" camps.

Can't say that you Macarthy witch hunt was very nice either.

No, it wasn't very nice. But it wasn't like the Communist
"reeducation" camps in Vietnam, either. I can't believe you're still
trying to draw that comparison.

Post by Werewolfy
Been to Vietnam? I was in Ho Chi MIn and Hanoi last year. It's hard to
equate the place with all of that death and destruction. The people
seemed happy enough. That';s more than can be said whilst you were
'medding' and 'preventing' the spread of that awful communism.

I have not returned to Vietnam, and I have no plans to. I live in the
vicinity of one of the largest Asian-American communities in the
United States, known as Little Saigon. I have known and talked to many
Vietnamese over the years. One common theme among them is a universal
hatred for Communism. But since Vietnam is in the process of
abandoning Communism, some of them are contemplating a return to their
homeland.

Post by Werewolfy
Go there now. Look around, ask questions.

I don't have to. I can talk to people where I live who have just come
from there. I know it is getting better, thanks to the industrious
people of South Vietnam. They have shown the Communist rulers of the
North that capitalism is a far more productive economic system than
their backward, repressive, murderous Communism.

Vietnam: From Communism to Capitalism:
Loading Image....php

Post by Werewolfy
Then ask, 'Why did we become involved here. What good did we do. How
can we justify all of the suffering and loss of life?"

Come to Little Saigon, look around, and ask questions. Tell those
people you'd have been just as happy to condemn them to a life of
Communism -- but be prepared to run when you do that.

Post by Werewolfy
Why, you were there to keep the nasty Russians distant from your home
sanctuary. Wouldn't do to let them have Vietnam, would it?

I notice you have ignored Korea in your response. I wonder if a trip
to North Korea would give you the same warm feeling you felt in
Vietnam?

Post by Werewolfy
Well, Stevie. Was it worth it?

Well, Rickie, I would say keeping South Vietnam free as long as we
(and the French) did was worth it, because it is the industrious
people of South Vietnam who have made Vietnam into the place you liked
so much. Otherwise, the place would be another North Korea. And was it
worth it to keep South Korea free? Just ask the people of South Korea
what they think.

[Werewolfy]

Post by Steven Douglas
I have not returned to Vietnam, and I have no plans to. I live in the
vicinity of one of the largest Asian-American communities in the
United States, known as Little Saigon. I have known and talked to many
Vietnamese over the years. One common theme among them is a universal
hatred for Communism.

Bias. You are talking to the 'wrong' Vietnamese. Those living near you
are of the 'American persuasion'. Of course they will loudly cheer
your way of life. Find the reality by staying for a while in Vietnam,
and mixing with the people living there now. Then, and only then, will
you be in a position where your opinion becomes 'informed'.

Post by Steven Douglas
I notice you have ignored Korea in your response. I wonder if a trip
to North Korea would give you the same warm feeling you felt in
Vietnam?

Yes, I ignore giving any opinion as to the quality of life in N Korea.
That is because I haven't been there, haven't mixed with the ordinary
people, and therefore have no first hand experience as to their life-
styles etc.
I talk about that which I know. Not that which I speculate or simply
read about.

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Werewolfy

Post by Steven Douglas
I have not returned to Vietnam, and I have no plans to. I live in the
vicinity of one of the largest Asian-American communities in the
United States, known as Little Saigon. I have known and talked to many
Vietnamese over the years. One common theme among them is a universal
hatred for Communism.

Bias. You are talking to the 'wrong' Vietnamese. Those living near you
are of the 'American persuasion'. Of course they will loudly cheer
your way of life. Find the reality by staying for a while in Vietnam,
and mixing with the people living there now. Then, and only then, will
you be in a position where your opinion becomes 'informed'.

I see. So did you ask any of the older Vietnamese you encountered
(especially in the South) their opinion of the Communist "reeducation"
camps many of them were forced to endure? And I'm sure many of the
younger people are perfectly happy to be living in society that is in
the process of abandoning Communism.

Post by Werewolfy

Post by Steven Douglas
I notice you have ignored Korea in your response. I wonder if a trip
to North Korea would give you the same warm feeling you felt in
Vietnam?

Yes, I ignore giving any opinion as to the quality of life in N Korea.
That is because I haven't been there, haven't mixed with the ordinary
people, and therefore have no first hand experience as to their life-
styles etc.

As with East Germany (and other Communist hellholes), many try to
escape. Some escape into China, and when they are caught by Chinese
authorities, they are returned to North Korea. I've seen video of
people being forcibly returned to North Korean police, kicking and
screaming all the way because they know what they're in for -- for
daring to escape they are first tortured, followed by the death
penalty. Such an enlightened society. Thankfully, the people of South
Korea have been spared the horrors of that society.

Post by Werewolfy
I talk about that which I know. Not that which I speculate or simply
read about.

So you have no concept of history?

[Werewolfy]

On Feb 1, 3:32?am, "Steven Douglas"

So you have no concept of history?

My, but you are a selective writer. You see a 'wrong' and condemn an
entire philosophy on the grounds of indignation.
That is, of course, as long as the 'wrong' is performed by the evil
enemy.

I take it that the only line I left uncut, was a rhetorical question?
It must be one, unless you believe that I am a severe amnesiac. Given
that, I'll ignore it along with your other 'points' which seem to
invariably take the form of a Quaker trying to convert an unbeliever
to his ideals.

You do that a lot, you know. Perhaps you didn't know?
Your posts read in the manner of a Mormon, a Jehovah's Witness, a
Missionary...trying to convince, convert, save.

Men such as you, those filled with a sense of self-righteousness, bore
me to tears. We have nothing in common. Were I to find one day that I
had 'turned into you', I expect I would initially run down the Street
screaming at the unfairness of it all. Then I would throw myself from
a very tall building.

But, thankfully, I'm not you. Today I think I'll cause some mischief
somewhere, insult a few people, walk on the grass and drive over red
traffic lights. It may not be much, but it makes me feel more 'alive'
than any notions of Devine beings, replete with attendent angels.

Werewolfy

[Docrodile]

Post by Werewolfy
Well, Stevie. Was it worth it?
Werewolfy

Bush finally made it to Viet Nam recently after choosing not to go there
to fight the Nam war decades ago.
He was helping drum up Western businesses' investment interest in their
low-wage, lower-tax economy...sort of an extension of his Yale days when
he was a cheerleader. LOL!
It wasn't worth risking his ass for many years ago, but it's a nice place
for the rich elitist to visit now.
If their economy gradually drifts into Westen capitalism, like China's, it
brings to the forefront that conservatives who supported 'liberating' Nam
in a bloody war many years ago, are now suggesting their 'liberation' is
being accomplished without all the death and destruction.
Wars are supported by infantile, impatient, arrogant, fanatical people,
Wolfy, IMO, who basically want sudden radical changes to help support
their ideological goals. Meaningful change, however, that is lasting is
more subtle, gradual, and usually takes a very long time.
Here's an interesting case where ideological change MAY be slowly working
into an 'adversarial' political/social system through a mutual interest in
international profiteering -- LOL!!!! But, time will tell whether that
process of change moves fully over to what the Western democracies
have...and one is reminded of the grim fact that a number of those
democracies, especially the largest one, the US, are rife with political,
corporate, and economic corruption and violence. Not to mention
citizenries permeated with narcissism, hedonism, and materialism, and an
alarmingly fast rising number of serious 'mental problems.'
Docrodile

[Charly the Bastard]

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around. Whatever it is, the man thankfully
is not representative of the average person in the world. Not even of
the average person in America...No webs for Wolfy though. It isn't
worth the bother.
Werewolfy

Of course we're selective, if a despot isn't sitting on a vital natural
resource, we could care less. Vietnam was an oil war too. Onshore and
offshore reserves to rival the Gulf of Mexico. Afghanistan has loads of
natural gas. The Soviets were in the process of exploiting that little
publicised reserve when they got their asses handed to them. Darfur is oil
country too, so I expect that we'll get involved there as well eventually.
You learn sooo much from Annual Shareholder Reports and The Petroleum
Journal...

Charly

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around. Whatever it is, the man thankfully
is not representative of the average person in the world. Not even of
the average person in America...No webs for Wolfy though. It isn't
worth the bother.
Werewolfy

Of course we're selective, if a despot isn't sitting on a vital natural
resource, we could care less. Vietnam was an oil war too. Onshore and
offshore reserves to rival the Gulf of Mexico. Afghanistan has loads of
natural gas. The Soviets were in the process of exploiting that little
publicised reserve when they got their asses handed to them. Darfur is oil
country too, so I expect that we'll get involved there as well eventually.
You learn sooo much from Annual Shareholder Reports and The Petroleum
Journal...

What do those sources say about our involvement in Korea?

[Charly the Bastard]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around. Whatever it is, the man thankfully
is not representative of the average person in the world. Not even of
the average person in America...No webs for Wolfy though. It isn't
worth the bother.
Werewolfy

Of course we're selective, if a despot isn't sitting on a vital natural
resource, we could care less. Vietnam was an oil war too. Onshore and
offshore reserves to rival the Gulf of Mexico. Afghanistan has loads of
natural gas. The Soviets were in the process of exploiting that little
publicised reserve when they got their asses handed to them. Darfur is oil
country too, so I expect that we'll get involved there as well eventually.
You learn sooo much from Annual Shareholder Reports and The Petroleum
Journal...

What do those sources say about our involvement in Korea?

I wouldn't know directly Steve. Why don't you be a good little librarian and
look it up and cut and paste it here for us. I was still in diapers when the
Korean 'police action' ended, so it classes as 'before my time'. I know that the
US got involved in Korea because the Soviet ambassador missed the SC meeting
where the vote was taken, and missed his opportunity to veto the action. I also
know that the Soviets, now the Russian Federation, hasn't missed a meeting
since. Personally, I view the regurgitation of Korea as just another lame
attempt to change the subject because you're losing the arguement on Iraq and
the Middle East.

Charly

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around. Whatever it is, the man thankfully
is not representative of the average person in the world. Not even of
the average person in America...No webs for Wolfy though. It isn't
worth the bother.
Werewolfy

Of course we're selective, if a despot isn't sitting on a vital natural
resource, we could care less. Vietnam was an oil war too. Onshore and
offshore reserves to rival the Gulf of Mexico. Afghanistan has loads of
natural gas. The Soviets were in the process of exploiting that little
publicised reserve when they got their asses handed to them. Darfur is oil
country too, so I expect that we'll get involved there as well eventually.
You learn sooo much from Annual Shareholder Reports and The
Petroleum Journal...

What do those sources say about our involvement in Korea?

I wouldn't know directly Steve. Why don't you be a good little librarian and
look it up and cut and paste it here for us. I was still in diapers when the
Korean 'police action' ended, so it classes as 'before my time'.

Same here, but that hasn't stopped me from learning about it. After
all, it is possible to learn about places and events without having
actual first hand knowledge.

Post by Charly the Bastard
I know that the US got involved in Korea because the Soviet ambassador
missed the SC meeting where the vote was taken, and missed his
opportunity to veto the action. I also know that the Soviets, now the
Russian Federation, hasn't missed a meeting since.

Even if the Soviets had vetoed it, Truman would have figured out a way
to get it done -- just as Clinton did when the Chinese and Russians
threatened to veto the Kosovo action.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Personally, I view the regurgitation of Korea as just another lame attempt
to change the subject because you're losing the arguement on Iraq and
the Middle East.

No, I asked you about Korea, because South Korea imports almost all of
its oil. So there must have been some reason other than oil for our
involvement in Korea. As for Vietnam, the oil companies had only
discovered the oil just before the Communists took over, and then were
forced to leave without any oil.

And now they have recently reached deals with the government of
Vietnam to start drilling again. Couldn't they have done that decades
ago? Of course that assumes they knew the oil was there, waited
decades (until 1974) to start drilling, and then immediately allowed
Congress to abandon South Vietnam to the Communists.

[Charly the Bastard]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around. Whatever it is, the man thankfully
is not representative of the average person in the world. Not even of
the average person in America...No webs for Wolfy though. It isn't
worth the bother.
Werewolfy

Of course we're selective, if a despot isn't sitting on a vital natural
resource, we could care less. Vietnam was an oil war too. Onshore and
offshore reserves to rival the Gulf of Mexico. Afghanistan has loads of
natural gas. The Soviets were in the process of exploiting that little
publicised reserve when they got their asses handed to them. Darfur is oil
country too, so I expect that we'll get involved there as well eventually.
You learn sooo much from Annual Shareholder Reports and The
Petroleum Journal...

What do those sources say about our involvement in Korea?

I wouldn't know directly Steve. Why don't you be a good little librarian and
look it up and cut and paste it here for us. I was still in diapers when the
Korean 'police action' ended, so it classes as 'before my time'.

Same here, but that hasn't stopped me from learning about it. After
all, it is possible to learn about places and events without having
actual first hand knowledge.

Post by Charly the Bastard
I know that the US got involved in Korea because the Soviet ambassador
missed the SC meeting where the vote was taken, and missed his
opportunity to veto the action. I also know that the Soviets, now the
Russian Federation, hasn't missed a meeting since.

Even if the Soviets had vetoed it, Truman would have figured out a way
to get it done -- just as Clinton did when the Chinese and Russians
threatened to veto the Kosovo action.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Personally, I view the regurgitation of Korea as just another lame attempt
to change the subject because you're losing the arguement on Iraq and
the Middle East.

No, I asked you about Korea, because South Korea imports almost all of
its oil. So there must have been some reason other than oil for our
involvement in Korea. As for Vietnam, the oil companies had only
discovered the oil just before the Communists took over, and then were
forced to leave without any oil.
And now they have recently reached deals with the government of
Vietnam to start drilling again. Couldn't they have done that decades
ago? Of course that assumes they knew the oil was there, waited
decades (until 1974) to start drilling, and then immediately allowed
Congress to abandon South Vietnam to the Communists.

Oh they knew that the oil was there. One of my buds has fotos of capped test holes
that he took incountry in '69. So the holes were there prior to '69. There was a map
in TPJ that detailed the leases, I'll dig through the archives and see if I can find
a cite for you, no guarantees though, paper tends to degrade into mush over thirty
years.

Charly

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a spider on a
fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various discussions
regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply because there isn't
really anything to argue about, or to discuss.
Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it all. A two year
old child would notice how selective the US is in it's various
'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the debacle of Vietnam so far distant
that it is forgotten? I don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this
world truly believe in the 'righteousness of it all.
I don't know Doc, perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around. Whatever it is, the man thankfully
is not representative of the average person in the world. Not even of
the average person in America...No webs for Wolfy though. It isn't
worth the bother.
Werewolfy

Of course we're selective, if a despot isn't sitting on a vital natural
resource, we could care less. Vietnam was an oil war too. Onshore and
offshore reserves to rival the Gulf of Mexico. Afghanistan has loads of
natural gas. The Soviets were in the process of exploiting that little
publicised reserve when they got their asses handed to them. Darfur is oil
country too, so I expect that we'll get involved there as well eventually.
You learn sooo much from Annual Shareholder Reports and The
Petroleum Journal...

What do those sources say about our involvement in Korea?

I wouldn't know directly Steve. Why don't you be a good little librarian and
look it up and cut and paste it here for us. I was still in diapers when the
Korean 'police action' ended, so it classes as 'before my time'.

Same here, but that hasn't stopped me from learning about it. After
all, it is possible to learn about places and events without having
actual first hand knowledge.

Post by Charly the Bastard
I know that the US got involved in Korea because the Soviet ambassador
missed the SC meeting where the vote was taken, and missed his
opportunity to veto the action. I also know that the Soviets, now the
Russian Federation, hasn't missed a meeting since.

Even if the Soviets had vetoed it, Truman would have figured out a way
to get it done -- just as Clinton did when the Chinese and Russians
threatened to veto the Kosovo action.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Personally, I view the regurgitation of Korea as just another lame attempt
to change the subject because you're losing the arguement on Iraq and
the Middle East.

No, I asked you about Korea, because South Korea imports almost all of
its oil. So there must have been some reason other than oil for our
involvement in Korea. As for Vietnam, the oil companies had only
discovered the oil just before the Communists took over, and then were
forced to leave without any oil.
And now they have recently reached deals with the government of
Vietnam to start drilling again. Couldn't they have done that decades
ago? Of course that assumes they knew the oil was there, waited
decades (until 1974) to start drilling, and then immediately allowed
Congress to abandon South Vietnam to the Communists.

Oh they knew that the oil was there. One of my buds has fotos of capped test holes
that he took incountry in '69. So the holes were there prior to '69. There was a map
in TPJ that detailed the leases, I'll dig through the archives and see if I can find
a cite for you, no guarantees though, paper tends to degrade into mush over thirty
years.

I'd like to see it. But I still wonder why they would have gone to the
trouble of fighting a war for oil (which only resulted in delaying the
drilling for decades), when they could have easily reached a deal with
the government of Vietnam decades earlier? And why would they have
chosen Vietnam as a war for oil, when Vietnam to this day is certainly
not among the world's largest producers of oil?

I also have a question about Afghanistan, which you mentioned
previously -- why, after we helped the Mujahideen drive the Soviets
out of there in the 1980s, did we just walk away?

[Perseid]

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Steven Douglas"

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Charly the Bastard

On Jan 31, 4:37 pm, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

On Jan 30, 2:10 pm, Charly the Bastard

Post by Charly the Bastard

Post by Werewolfy
"His ego and pride and immaturity won't let it happen...so
give it up, Wolfy, before he tries to drain you dry like a
spider on a fly."
I know...I've been rather a by-stander through the various
discussions regarding Iraq. I think I am like that, simply
because there isn't really anything to argue about, or to
discuss. Bloody Hell, an Orang Utan would see the folly of it
all. A two year old child would notice how selective the US
is in it's various 'campaigns' to 'free' people. Is the
debacle of Vietnam so far distant that it is forgotten? I
don't believe so, and yet the Stevens of this world truly
believe in the 'righteousness of it all. I don't know Doc,
perhaps it has something to do with the weight of
that heavy bible he carries around. Whatever it is, the man
thankfully is not representative of the average person in the
world. Not even of the average person in America...No webs
for Wolfy though. It isn't worth the bother.
Werewolfy

Of course we're selective, if a despot isn't sitting on a vital
natural resource, we could care less. Vietnam was an oil war
too. Onshore and offshore reserves to rival the Gulf of Mexico.
Afghanistan has loads of natural gas. The Soviets were in the
process of exploiting that little publicised reserve when they
got their asses handed to them. Darfur is oil country too, so I
expect that we'll get involved there as well eventually.
You learn sooo much from Annual Shareholder Reports and The
Petroleum Journal...

What do those sources say about our involvement in Korea?

I wouldn't know directly Steve. Why don't you be a good little
librarian and look it up and cut and paste it here for us. I was
still in diapers when the Korean 'police action' ended, so it
classes as 'before my time'.

Same here, but that hasn't stopped me from learning about it. After
all, it is possible to learn about places and events without having
actual first hand knowledge.

Post by Charly the Bastard
I know that the US got involved in Korea because the Soviet
ambassador missed the SC meeting where the vote was taken, and
missed his opportunity to veto the action. I also know that the
Soviets, now the Russian Federation, hasn't missed a meeting since.

Even if the Soviets had vetoed it, Truman would have figured out a
way to get it done -- just as Clinton did when the Chinese and
Russians threatened to veto the Kosovo action.

Post by Charly the Bastard
Personally, I view the regurgitation of Korea as just another lame
attempt to change the subject because you're losing the arguement
on Iraq and the Middle East.

No, I asked you about Korea, because South Korea imports almost all
of its oil. So there must have been some reason other than oil for
our involvement in Korea. As for Vietnam, the oil companies had only
discovered the oil just before the Communists took over, and then
were forced to leave without any oil.
And now they have recently reached deals with the government of
Vietnam to start drilling again. Couldn't they have done that decades
ago? Of course that assumes they knew the oil was there, waited
decades (until 1974) to start drilling, and then immediately allowed
Congress to abandon South Vietnam to the Communists.

Oh they knew that the oil was there. One of my buds has fotos of capped
test holes that he took incountry in '69. So the holes were there prior
to '69. There was a map in TPJ that detailed the leases, I'll dig
through the archives and see if I can find a cite for you, no
guarantees though, paper tends to degrade into mush over thirty years.

I'd like to see it. But I still wonder why they would have gone to the
trouble of fighting a war for oil (which only resulted in delaying the
drilling for decades), when they could have easily reached a deal with
the government of Vietnam decades earlier? And why would they have
chosen Vietnam as a war for oil, when Vietnam to this day is certainly
not among the world's largest producers of oil?
I also have a question about Afghanistan, which you mentioned
previously -- why, after we helped the Mujahideen drive the Soviets
out of there in the 1980s, did we just walk away?

No oil ?

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Woodswun
I would say that forcing Muslims out of India, deliberately

Post by Woodswun
addicting the Chinese to opium, and forcing Indians to work in South
Africa was pretty dominating, Ricky.

Agreed..but it's a matter of semantics Woodsy. I class those things
under 'exploitation'.
The English military relied heavily on Indian troops, recruited
avidly. It was an odd way of life by today's standards...But the
Indian people didn't object a great deal to it. Many profited by our
presence, and order was established amongst numerous waring parties.
To be the same, you need to recruit Iraqi's from Baghdad directly into
the US army,

Iraq is already a sovereign nation. If we were recruiting Iraqis
directly into the US Army, your assumption that we are an occupier
would be correct. Instead, the objective has been to get Iraq on its
feet as a sovereign nation. And by the way, don't forget your nation
was right there with us every step of the way.

LOL!! Iraq was already 'on its feet' -- the US preemptive invasion knocked
it off its feet. And with 12 years of harsh sanctions hurting its people
more than its goverment,

Incredible. You place NO blame on the Iraqi government for those UN
sanctions? Incredible. Oh wait! I just remembered! You must be joking,
you simple clown!

[Docrodile]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Woodswun
I would say that forcing Muslims out of India, deliberately

Post by Steven Douglas
Iraq is already a sovereign nation. If we were recruiting Iraqis

directly into the US Army, your assumption that we are an occupier
would be correct. Instead, the objective has been to get Iraq on its
feet as a sovereign nation. And by the way, don't forget your nation
was right there with us every step of the way.

LOL!! Iraq was already 'on its feet' -- the US preemptive invasion knocked
it off its feet. And with 12 years of harsh sanctions hurting its people
more than its goverment,

Incredible. You place NO blame on the Iraqi government for those UN
sanctions? Incredible. Oh wait! I just remembered! You must be joking,
you simple clown! AND WE ATTACKED TO SAVE THE IRAQI PEOPLE FROM SADDAM'S
IRRESPONSIBLITY??? DON'T MAKE ME LAUGH. WE ATTACKED JUNIOR TO GET RID
OF THE WMD THREAT AND IF YOU READ BELOW, THERE WAS NO CONVENTIONAL
MILITARY THREAT TO OUR SECURITY, AND AS IT TURNED OUT, NO WMD EITHER. SO
YOU WANT TO ATTACK AND REMOVE DICTATORS, DO YA, THAT TREAT THEIR PEOPLE
POORLY? LETS DIG UP FORD AND KICK HIM AROUND FOR NOT INVADING CAMBODIA
AND REMOVING POL POT...AND YOU KEEP AVOIDING THIS, NOW THAT I'VE BROUGHT
IT UP AT LEAST THREE TIMES. WHY ARE YOU AVOIDING THE CAMBODIA ISSUE,
LIL' STEVIE? LOL !! WELL, I KNOW WHY...AND SO DO YOU, ASSHOLE. YOU'RE A
PIECE OF HUMAN SHIT FELLA TO SUPPORT THIS WAR AND BUSH, TO USE OUR
MILITARY FOR AN IDEOLOGICAL JOY RIDE FOR YOUR PLEASURE AND
SATISFACTION,AND TO PUSH THE IRAQI PEOPLE INTO YEARS OF HARDSHIP AND NOW
A CIVIL WAR WHILE YOU SIT ON YOUR PIMPLY FUCKING ASS AND BELLOW ABOUT
FREEING THE OPPRESSED ARABS...YOU DISINGENUOUS DUMB DICKHEAD. YOU MISSED
YOUR CALLING BY BIRTH..YOU SHOULD HAVE LIVED DURING THE NAZI REGIME,
KID. LOL!!!!! I'm typing all caps so as to aid your ADD problem and ease
up your glazed eye syndrome.

And you tell me how exactly did the violation of the UN Resolutions --
occasional missile lock-ons and mobile bases blown up by our military and
with NONE of our planes downed or even winged in 12 years of
fly-overs...no military movement beyond his borders into Saudi Arabia or
Kuwait or Iran or...anywhere...TELL US, BOY SCOUT, HOW THIS DIRECTLY
THREATENED US OR ANYONE. No air force left, just some short-range
missiles, old Scuds. How exactly did his violating those precious UNSC
resolutions directly threaten the US's security...and of course, NO WMD.
So, where was the threat, Stevie, to our national interest, our allies, or
directly on us? It wasn't there, bird brain. It was never there, asshole.
Except in your imagination and fanatical ideological dreams, Mr.
Frustrated Peacetime Ex-Soldier Boy. If 12 long years of sanctions went
by, you'd think Saddam would've had us eatin' peanuts out of his hand by
then, but, noooo, he was caged up by the US and UN inspectors.
Too bad you couldn't have had a shooting war to get your arms and legs
blown off...for your raving idealism, your utopian dreams. But, really, I
would've preferred they'd just blown your stupid fingers off, and then
you'd had a fucking hard time arrogantly relaying your crap-headed
fantasies and neononic extremism to us or anywhere on the net. You
arrogant Jesus-dick licker, you fascist fucker.
Any time this 'clown' can entertain ya some more, drip dick, let me know
and I'll be glad to give you a special show -- show you how fast I can
make your bible disappear up your egotistical ass, and then pull it out of
your mouth, read a passage or two from Psalms, and then make it vanish
real fast down your throat.
Docrodile

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Woodswun
I would say that forcing Muslims out of India, deliberately

Post by Steven Douglas
Iraq is already a sovereign nation. If we were recruiting Iraqis

directly into the US Army, your assumption that we are an occupier
would be correct. Instead, the objective has been to get Iraq on its
feet as a sovereign nation. And by the way, don't forget your nation
was right there with us every step of the way.

LOL!! Iraq was already 'on its feet' -- the US preemptive invasion knocked
it off its feet. And with 12 years of harsh sanctions hurting its people
more than its goverment,

Incredible. You place NO blame on the Iraqi government for those UN
sanctions? Incredible. Oh wait! I just remembered! You must be joking,
you simple clown!

AND WE ATTACKED TO SAVE THE IRAQI PEOPLE FROM SADDAM'S

<snip unread>

I have no interest in reading your upper case ranting.

[Docrodile]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Woodswun
I would say that forcing Muslims out of India, deliberately

Post by Steven Douglas
Iraq is already a sovereign nation. If we were recruiting Iraqis

directly into the US Army, your assumption that we are an occupier
would be correct. Instead, the objective has been to get Iraq on its
feet as a sovereign nation. And by the way, don't forget your nation
was right there with us every step of the way.

LOL!! Iraq was already 'on its feet' -- the US preemptive invasion knocked
it off its feet. And with 12 years of harsh sanctions hurting its people
more than its goverment,

Incredible. You place NO blame on the Iraqi government for those UN
sanctions? Incredible. Oh wait! I just remembered! You must be joking,
you simple clown!

AND WE ATTACKED TO SAVE THE IRAQI PEOPLE FROM SADDAM'S

<snip unread>
I have no interest in reading your upper case ranting.

I THINK YOU NEED A FUCKING HOBBY LIKE BIRD-WATCHING AND GET YOUR POMPOUS
ASS OUTTA' SUCKING ON NEWS AND POLITICS, AND THEN REGURGITATING THE WHOLE
FUCKING MESS HERE.

EVERY TIME YOU POP THOSE PRISTINE PINKIES ON THE KEYS YOU THINK ABOUT THIS
JUNIOR --

THOUSANDS HAVE LOST PARTS OF THEIR BODIES IN THIS FUTILE FUCKING WAR
YOU'VE BEEN IDEOLOGICALLY STROKING YOUR EGO WITH HERE...

AND YOU CAN KISS MY GODDAMN ASS, YOU SIMPLE FASCIST.

Docrodile

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Werewolfy
On Jan 29, 2:03?pm, "Steven Douglas" > And don't forget, your country
was right there with us. The old

Post by Steven Douglas
British Empire had a history of world domination, didn't they?

Oh yes, they certainly did. It was however, a benign Empire. They
exploited certainly, but the idea was always to return power to the
occupied Country. More than an idea actually, a reality. One by one,
power and independence was restored, in favour of a 'commonwealth' of
Nations. You would find the children of rich Indians for example, sent
to prestigious public schools, such as Eton, in order to arrive at an
'English' standard, suitable to govern their land.

We have also restored independence to nations formerly under our
control. Examples are Cuba and the Philippines. In fact, the
Philippines later decided it no longer wanted our military bases on
their land, and we left without an argument. Puerto Rico continues as
a territory of the United States because the people of Puerto Rico
voted to maintain that status. Their choices were independence,
statehood, or the status quo. They chose the status quo.

Post by Werewolfy
Do you have many Iraqi's in American Universities , sent specifically
to learn about fair Government?

There are many Iraqis living in the United States. Many have been
educated here and have gone home after graduation. Many have chosen to
stay and make this their home. This is nothing new. It's been going on
for decades.

Post by Werewolfy
The British Empire had many faults, but domination was never one of
them.

My point is not to be critical of the British Empire. I just hoped you
might take another look at the United States and see that while we're
not perfect (just as the actions of the British Empire were not
perfect), we might not be quite as bad as you seem to think we are.

[Docrodile]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by mukyuk

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could
call
that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

Not only all, that but the computer has basically taken over all
our
lives.
Justlookatus!!

Your computer HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?

What skin did you lose off your Jesus-lovin' ass if he spends a lot of
time online?

Well, Mr. Bigot, as I've mentioned to mukyuk in the past, spending too
much time online can cause one to feel depressed. I'm sure in your
infinite wisdom you've heard of those studies -- but for those who

Well, Professor Stevie, I know about the numerous studies done on internet
life. It seems clear to me that the internet continues to grow in
popularity and influences many vital parts of our daily lives. Futurists
years ago had predicted that electronic lifestyles would become
increasingly important and popular, to which I say, "So what?" The
adaptability of the human creature is extensive, and, for better or worse,
it will incorporate new forms of communication, work, play, commerce,
etc., using the internet in all its forms (branching into mobile phone
tech). Christians always rail against the rather sudden and massive social
changes, and become apprehensive, with some moving toward repression and
oppression of the new lifestyle. You can look back in the archives and
find stories and studies on the religious community's overreactions to
such emerging technologies as radio, tv, telephones, electricity,
automobiles, airplanes, space travel, etc. Their concerns gave way
inevitably to an acceptance and assimiliation of these new ways of living,
working, interrelationships, etc., by the great majority of
social/religious/political 'hold outs' originally opposed to such changes.
So, it is not unusual for a backward-ass christian like yourself to think
there is something sinister, something wrong, something detrimental about
the internet.

Where did I say there was something sinister, wrong, or detrimental
about the internet, you arrogant pompous windbag? And where have I
made my Christianity an issue in any of my discussions with you, you
arrogant pompous windbag?

The context of your depositing the article that has fears the net is
ruining the social fabric is enough to clearly understand that you wanted
to let me know you think the net is warping my life.
Maybe you were born yesterday, kid, but I wasn't. I know exactly why you
put the article there, even if you're so goddamned disassociative and
deceptive and self-delusional and lying you don't or can't know. You make
a fool of yourself with such thinly veiled egotistical displays, and
recreate the reasons for the displays, spinning them to show how stupid
your opponents are, and how intellectually cool, superior, and mature you
are.
You just let the stinky blast of wind outta' yo' arrogant ass again, kid,
and it smells like psychosis in the gale force of it.
Naaah...you don't make your christian ideology part of the frame of your
arguments here...naaah...you goddamn Jesus-dick lickin' psycho.
LOL!
Docrodile :)~

[Steven Douglas]

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by mukyuk

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could
call
that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

Not only all, that but the computer has basically taken over all
our
lives.
Justlookatus!!

Your computer HAS taken over your life, hasn't it? You seem to be on
it 24 hours a day. Does an alarm sound whenever someone posts
something?

What skin did you lose off your Jesus-lovin' ass if he spends a lot of
time online?

Well, Mr. Bigot, as I've mentioned to mukyuk in the past, spending too
much time online can cause one to feel depressed. I'm sure in your
infinite wisdom you've heard of those studies -- but for those who

Well, Professor Stevie, I know about the numerous studies done on internet
life. It seems clear to me that the internet continues to grow in
popularity and influences many vital parts of our daily lives. Futurists
years ago had predicted that electronic lifestyles would become
increasingly important and popular, to which I say, "So what?" The
adaptability of the human creature is extensive, and, for better or worse,
it will incorporate new forms of communication, work, play, commerce,
etc., using the internet in all its forms (branching into mobile phone
tech). Christians always rail against the rather sudden and massive social
changes, and become apprehensive, with some moving toward repression and
oppression of the new lifestyle. You can look back in the archives and
find stories and studies on the religious community's overreactions to
such emerging technologies as radio, tv, telephones, electricity,
automobiles, airplanes, space travel, etc. Their concerns gave way
inevitably to an acceptance and assimiliation of these new ways of living,
working, interrelationships, etc., by the great majority of
social/religious/political 'hold outs' originally opposed to such changes.
So, it is not unusual for a backward-ass christian like yourself to think
there is something sinister, something wrong, something detrimental about
the internet.

Where did I say there was something sinister, wrong, or detrimental
about the internet, you arrogant pompous windbag? And where have I
made my Christianity an issue in any of my discussions with you, you
arrogant pompous windbag?

The context of your depositing the article that has fears the net is
ruining the social fabric is enough to clearly understand that you wanted
to let me know you think the net is warping my life.

Nice try, mindreader, but you're wrong. First of all, that CNN article
has no opinion about the net ruining the social fabric. And secondly,
I really didn't post it for your benefit. I posted it in response to
you asking me about my previous comment to another poster.

[Docrodile]

Post by Steven Douglas

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

revelation, or voice it before we go...and I guess you could
call
that a
liberating choice.
Docrodile

,

Post by Steven Douglas
I really didn't post it for your benefit. I posted it in response to
you asking me about my previous comment to another poster.

Isn't it amazing there are such a large number of *misunderstandings* you
accuse people of having about your posts, or your intentions, or
inferences? Hmmmmm...seems hardly anyone can truly read your posts and
understand them, requiring your to offer explanations, reinterpretations,
RECREATIONS, and just plain fucking lies, Junior. Why, golly, kid, your
writings are just as cryptic and subject to various interpretations as
Nostradamus's! LOL!

What do you mean, liar, that the article has "no opinion" ?? Opinions can
be slyly voiced by presenting others' research and their opinions...you
should know, you do it here all the time! And then deny, when under heat
for any of representing your opinion, all you need to do is give the
answer you did right here and now about the CNN article. It wasn't a slam
at me, oh, no, it had to do with someone else. YOU ARE A LIAR, KID! Do we
need to constantly keep going back over what you just posted and analyze
each and every fucking word of it, or do we just simply read it and know
what your intent was?
I know what your intent with the article was...it takes no mind reading,
farty pants. Just elemental knowledge of human psychology is enough to
figure you out.
I know why, without mind reading, why you queried the AP writer. You're
transparent. Maybe you think we don't understand the motives of a
child-like personality? We were all children, long ago...
You're one of the most consistently disassociative psychotic childishly
argumentative people I've run into on the net in chat groups or
anywhere...nearly everything is argued by you, no matter how trivial,
refashioned to benefit your argument whenever your argument is weakened,
and you contribute enthusiastically to long self-indulgent threads, but
deny you're on the net but for a 'few minutes'...and you don't make the
net a big part of your life...hence, the article directed towards me.
Let me tell you that I've invested a lot of money in expensive computer
hardware and software,and I am a prolific writer and researcher, and was
writing and researching before you were born, haunting libraries all over
my area. I see absolutely nothing unusual about investing a lot of time in
what I like to do, and what I've spent a lot of dough for, kid. I wouldn't
have spent all this goddamn money on the hi-tech shit if I wasn't
intensely interested in using it a lot. Stands to reason for any
reasonable mature adult, except you have consistently raised "net life" as
an issue here, saying it's not 'real' life, and why don't we 'get a life'
and so on. Life is everything and anything people do, and like to do, or
have to do...and you're no different, junior, and, being hypocritical,
you're not the one to judge other's priorities and values. If you think
the net isn't a healthy activity, then get the fuck outta' this group,
stop spending so much time in it, creating a 'cottage industry' of
self-indulgence and smirking self-satisfaction for yourself!!!! Don't be a
... hypocrite!
I seriously wonder how you became so disassociative, so far removed from
self-realization. So psychotic...conflictual...obsessed...
Were you butt-raped as a child by a transient or something? Dropped in
the hospital delivery room as a baby? Left as an orphan in a garbage can?
I laugh every time I think about what's left of the support for Bush and
his policies--people like you and Jean. ROFL! I can hardly envision a
future dominated by psychos and fanatics, whirling around in their hellish
obsessions, thier tight-fisted anxieties, always fighting several bloody
conflicts at a time, and look forward to more conflicts, defending their
megalomania, and sanctimoniously sermonizing...such as you and Jean and
Bush and Cheney and all the rest of the Mad Hatters.
Docrodile

[Perseid Rocks]

After Much Chewing of Cud and Cogitation, "Docrodile"

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks

Post by Charly the Bastard
We are
trapped by powers that we don't want to risk throwing off, and content
(with antidepressants, toys, narcissism, et al)

You don't have to live with daily doses of non-prescription drugs.
You don't have to watch tv ads. You don't have to buy toys which
feed your ego. In short, if you feel trapped by this socio-economic
structure, it's because you've allowed yourself to becomed trapped
by it.
Try going for a hike in the mountains every other day. Read a
good book, learn a new language, expand your mind and horizon.
Break out of the entrapment. Take control.

Sounds like a speech to the Sierra Club... LOL! (I think you
forget my age and I'm well educated, and have experienced many
things.)

... yet you say you feel 'trapped' by the consumer-driven
society we live in. Well, get away from the consumer part of
it and better yourself. That's an easy solution, that is, unless
it's something else making you feel this way. Perhaps you feel
'trapped' for some other reason and this whole consumer-corporate
thing is just a convenient argument... something to fill the time.

Post by Docrodile
When you get your backpack on, where did you get it from? Water
bottle? Clothes? Shoes? Underwear? Toothpaste and brush? Munchies?
If you get a headache, where did the aspirin or acetaminophen (etc)
come from? Transportation to the starting point for the 'breakaway
freedom hike' -- where did the transporatation come from? The gas
for it? The bicycle? No, we don't have to do 'anything' that is
the standard consumer lifestyle -- that's true. We don't HAVE
to. You're right. And, I reiterate -- how many will choose to
accept the easiest, most convenient path? Most. And how will
your rebellion, your resistance, change the paradigm if you
continue to rely heavily on the creators of it, and what they
provide? Cherry picking in your lifestyle, while remaining
largely codependent on the corporate TIT, isn't an expansion
of anything liberating -- it's a resignation, a denial, a
delusion that you're moving beyond 'the masses' into some
freewheeling world of DIY, rugged individualism, iconoclastic
trail-blazing.

You're the one who said you felt 'trapped'. Personally I don't
object to having 50,000,000 consumer products to choose from,
and I won't shy away from favoring one company and punishing
another for their inept manufacturing or design process.

Whether or not my point of view is 'liberating' is quite
subjective and I'll allow you to have your own opinion just
as long as you don't attack mine. I don't view a massive
choice at the store as being a 'resignation' or 'denial'.
Explain your reasoning here if you will. Denial of what,
that I don't know how to personally build a toothpaste
squeezer ? I don't deny this.

Post by Docrodile

Post by Perseid Rocks
Again, I have no complaints about some company making a profit
by making something useful that I might want to buy.

And how much stuff is that, Perseid? C'mon, how many things do you
DIY, guy? Give me more details...it'd be better for you in the long
run if you just face up to your heavy dependence, your habit, on
sucking on that ol' BIG TIT just like everyone does. And you might
take a hard self-examination as to why you're trying to fool ol'
Doc...or yourself, or others here. I know you've bought into the
popular trend of yuppie types

You have something against an 'everything under the sun' selection
of consumer products ? Personally I don't, and I'm not sure how
this turned into an argument for a dissociation of ourselves from
society.

You clearly have taken a position in this argument, but you have
to more clearly define it for me. I don't quite get what you're
trying to sell.

[r***@inmail24.com]

God is inside that UFO watching...watching....

[fuck-a-doodle-loooo]

some swap gas reflected light from Venus


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 000710-0, 03/02/2007
Tested on: 4/02/2007 9:11:36 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

[Docrodile]

I don't believe it. You had fart gas ignite at a swap meet and a chick
named Venus shone a light on it? Sounds kinky, but far fetched to me.

Post by fuck-a-doodle-loooo
some swap gas reflected light from Venus
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 000710-0, 03/02/2007
Tested on: 4/02/2007 9:11:36 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com