Re: [OT] Bruce Perens talks to BBC
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 03:55:21 -0800
Steve Lamb <grey@dmiyu.org> wrote:
> Katipo wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 13:42:14 -0600 "Dave's List Addy"
> > <listonly@webpresencegroup.net> wrote:
> >> On 1/26/04 6:00 PM, "Paul M Foster" wrote:
> >>> 1. Don't call us when you need help fending off the next power-mad
> >>> psycho bent on enslaving the entire planet.
>
> > This personality is your current president, ably assisted by a cabal of
> > like personalities.
>
> Such as a multitude of European leaders. Sorry, I really dislike the guy
> but there's no comparison.
>
> >>> 2. Don't call us when you've finished erecting the full-on socialist
> >>> state you're busy creating in Europe, and you don't like the results.
>
> > I'm not European, but from my objective viewpoint, they seem to be heading
> > in the right direction.
>
> How's that? Socialism doesn't work. Hasn't worked before. Won't work in
> the future. Doesn't work in small scales. Doesn't work in large scales. It
> falls apart and in the process ruins all that it touches.
>
> > Why don't you just get your totally unnecessary military bases out of
> > there.
>
> I'm sorry, I must have missed something. When did the nations in question
> request they be removed instead of request that they be there? In spite of
> your skewed perception of reality those bases can only exist at the sufferance
> of the nations that provide the land for them.
>
> Be that as it may I happen to agree with you there. But let's keep the
> facts straight, eh?
>
> > You only went in to Yugoslavia because after the russian withdrawal from
> > east Germany, there was no more justification to stay on in west Germany
> > (although, I note you are still there), to maintain a military base on the
> > european continent.
>
> While I think it was a mistake I find it interesting that you feel that
> Europe, in general, trending towards socialism is a good thing (based on the
> "good" it does for the pleb...er, citizens) yet poo-poo the US from stopping
> the slaughter of one people by another in *BOTH* directions. One presumes
> then that you'd rather they just up and kill themselves or is it more that you
> only want a government doing the right thing when it is your version of what
> is a proper government?
>
> >>> 3. Don't come here to escape your crushing taxes.
>
> > Imposed as a necessity to pay off the exhorbitant cost of American 'aid.'
>
> Uh, no. France and Germany are doing quite well on their own by
> increasing their population base even though there is not a need through
> subsidized breeding programs which guarnetee large sums of money per child.
> That has to be funded somehow; guess how.
>
> >>> 4. Don't come here to avoid your crappy socialized health care >
> >>>> system.
>
> > The only westernized nation that spends less on health care/capita than the
> > U.S. is Turkey.
>
> Aaaand we still have people from nations with socialized health care
> coming here to get treatment. What's that tell you? Hint, see the top of my
> message about socialised systems NOT WORKING.
>
> >>> 5. Don't expect sympathy when 3000 of your citizens become victims
> >>>> of the next Islamist nut job with a plan, who claims he hates the
> >>>> U.S. but inexplicably attacks you instead.
>
> > And where is this occuring, other than with your 'friends and allies.'
>
> Oh how quickly we forget Yugoslavia. I mean you only see it as
> heavy-handedness. Try reading the details sometime.
>
> >>> 6. Don't come here to find "opportunity" or "the promise of a better
> >>> life." That includes you, Mexico.
>
> > The "opportunity" and "the promise of a better life" are all things of the
> > past in America.
>
> Yet people still flood here from other nations. Imagine that. Have you
> honestly been here to find out firsthand? I think, actually, that opportunity
> is quite apt. Look it up sometime to see the difference between it and what
> most of Europe is sliding towards. Opportunity it is not.
>
> > It's true that the U.S. have taken in many from other cultures, it's also
> > true that it is also the standout hotbed of racism in the world today.
>
> *laugh* You've got to be kidding me, right? The standout hotbed of
> racism? You mean what happened in Yugoslavia wasn't racism. Or what happens
> on a daily basis between Isreal and its neighbors? How about the handful of
> racial purges in central Africa. Dare we also mention the racial tensions in
> SE Asia? What do all of those have in common that isn't present in the US
> which is the "standout hotbed of racism"? How about open bloodshed of
> thousands of people? How about the regular occurance of rape, torture,
> mutlation and wholesale slaughter? Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall
> a single instance of whole communities being murdered in recent US history.
>
> > Your national baseball competition is termed the 'World Series.'
>
> And yet we bring in players from other nations. Tell me, outside of
> Japan, where else is there a widespread playing of Baseball? Actually, that's
> the wrong question to ask. When the phrase was coined outside of the US how
> many nations had baseball teams? Hm?
>
> > When I visit your country, my visa is stamped with the word 'alien' as if I
> > am not of the same species, perhaps not even from the same planet.
>
> It's obvious from your writing you have an excellent command of the
> English language yet you quibble over words that have multiple meanings.
> Sorry, the entire language has that. I'm quite positive most people aren't
> expecting you to be a little green man from mars from that word...
>
> Main Entry: 2alien
> Function: noun
> 1 : a person of another family, race, or nation
> 2 : a foreign-born resident who has not been naturalized and is still a
> subject or citizen of a foreign country; broadly : a foreign-born citizen
> 3 : EXTRATERRESTRIAL
>
> ...given that the dominant two usages have nothing to do with the 3rd.
>
> > If you look around, you will observe many other symptoms of the disease,
> > but this will not slow you down in your headlong flight into lunacy.
>
> Actually I'd enjoy you to give further examples to prove that it is you on
> the headlong flight into lunacy.
>
> > A U.S. open source advocate that spent some time overseas recently,
> > returned to the states and noted in his writing that it was fashionable to
> > hate America throughout the world at the moment.
>
> Which it is. Your post proves it so because if your are representative of
> that fashion then the ignorance is quite profound.
>
> > It's not fashion, it is more substantial than that. But clowns like you
> > that read and believe every word in your tame press will not even pause to
> > consider why this might be.
>
> Uh, no, it isn't more substantial. It's funny that clowns like you
> believe that all Americans do two things:
>
> a: only listen to their press and
> b: believe everything it says.
>
> We do get broadcasts from other nations here. A good many people do
> listen to them.
>
> > Why an ever accelerating number of world citizens, ordinary everyday
> > people, are rapidly taking up this perception.
>
> Could it be because they are listening to their media and believing all of
> what they say without thinking for themselves? Could it be the limiting view
> their parochial education and limited political choice? I mean the hypocricy
> and ignorance in your message is stunningl; bordering on dumbfounding in fact.
>
> > In the not too distant future, the U.S. is going to be the last bastion of
> > human existence in a world totally populated otherwise by terrorists, and
> > still you will refuse to consider that you are going in the wrong
> > direction.
>
> We're going the wrong direction. What would the right direction be? If
> your message is any indication it is to let racial hotbeds where thousands are
> slaughtered for no better reason than they are different because you're more
> concerned about the fact that the US has, at best, racial tensions. Tensions,
> I might add, which are fed more by the people trying to "fix" it than the
> people they're supposedly trying to perpetuate it. It is to limit freedoms,
> strip individuals of their earnings, make them dependant on the state all in
> an effort to do.. what? Set them free? Of what?
>
> > All your pathetic faith placed in personalities like Bush and
> > Cheney, once and still executive figures with Enron and Haliburton, prime
> > examples in the history of corporate corruption, and still not brought to
> > trial.
>
> Another misconception in a message full of them. Newsflash, Bush lost
> the popular vote. There are quite a few people here pissed off about that.
> Furthermore he has butchered the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Many more
> people are ticked off about that. If you think that the US is uniformly
> behind its present you're just plain stupid. I, for one, have no faith in
> Bush and if it were possible less in Cheney. I didn't vote for them and
> certainly won't come the next election. I've been vocal about my opposition.
> Do a google search.
>
> > I note that Haliburton recently finished its' allocated contract in
> > the restoration of Iraqi oil reserves. Jobs for the boys. I note also, in
> > passing, that Iraq possessed 25% of the worlds' oil reserves. I employ the
> > past tense because it doesn't anymore, does it?
>
> Yes, and? You think all Americans are happy about those events? Hell
> even our "tame media" has reported about the dissention and has made inqueries
> as to why that's all happening. What, your media not cluing you into that fact.
>
> >>> 7. Don't expect our help in creating an economy or a society that
> >>> actually works. Our founding documents are all on the internet for you
> >>> to peruse. That's how we did it and how we do it.
>
> > Advertised, but not adhered to. Franklins' America doesn't exist anymore.
>
> Yes. And some of us aren't pleased about that and are fighting to get it
> back. Having people like you lumping "all Americans" together in your passe'
> fad of hating Americans through your hypocritical notions certainly doesn't
> endear us to you.
>
> >>> 8. Don't expect to benefit from any technological advances created in
> >>> the U.S., including new life-saving drugs.
>
> > Derived from global forests that are being mown down at a phenomenal rate
> > by American timber interests, given the nod by American backed South
> > American dictators trained in the school of the americas in Georgia, U.S.A.
> > The potential for new, life-saving drugs is being destroyed faster than
> > the current species extinction rate.
>
> Uh-huh. It's our fault those nations are letting their logging companies
> do what they do. Yup. I mean it isn't like there hasn't been pressure on
> those nations to curb logging from US interests and they've refused because it
> is the basis of their economy. And let's completely ignore the net increase
> in fauna in the US at the same time.
>
> >>> 9. Don't call us.
>
> > Well, we are still trying to, the lights are on, but no one appears to be
> > home.
>
> No, see, you have to pick up the phone first. So far all you've done is
> rant about the uniformity of American policy and fail to see the plethora of
> competing interests. You poo-poo certain policies while lamenting the lack of
> others even though the basis of both is the same. No, it is you with the lit
> but empty house.
>
> >>> Yeah, the U.S. really sucks. And we love hearing it over and over again
> >>> from people who are cut off from the fruits of observation,
>
> > Not really, we are the ones with the subjective experience and the
> > objective viewpoint not tied to a tame media.
>
> Yup. That biting media sure does you well since you have a view that all
> Americans think the President's the cat's meow and that everything the US does
> is hunky-dory.
>
> >>> and are really incapable of doing anything but whining.
>
> > We are capable of a lot more than that, but whining will suffice for now.
>
> Prove it. Time and again I listen to the ambassadors and representatives
> of the world speak and I have to laugh and the doublethink they have to go
> through just to make it through the day. My favorite is France. France has
> outlawed certain speech. In an interview the French representative actually
> said, "France has free speech. Anyone is free to say what they want so long
> as it isn't something that is against the law."
>
> >>> Or who really just have a socialist or communist agenda.
>
> > This is fifties McCarthyism, an American invention.
>
> Which was wrong. Doesn't mean that socialism and communism is right.
>
> Quite frankly I'd be more than happy if the US got out of the world. I'm
> tired of footing the bill for other nation's defense. I'd love for the US to
> get out of Isreal and Palastine. Not that we're really *IN* it, mind you,
> except for urging both sides into talking instead of blowing up marketplaces
> and bulldozing settlements. Out of the substates of Yugoslavia. Out of the
> world in general. Let it all go to hell because it is clear that in most
> cases that's exactly what the people want. Bring it back to our borders and
> leave it there save for one understanding; any nation messes with us we will
> retaliate en force. We'll leave you hellbound hypocrocites alone but you had
> best leave us alone in return. Isolationist but with the right to defend
> ourselves. Let people come and go as they please. Let the commercial
> interests do what they will within the bounds of the nations they deal with
> but as a government, as a nation, let the world be. Stand or fall on its own.
> It's not our problem. Make the offical comment on every little petty (in
> your eyes) racial slaughter "not our problem."
>
> But of course you wouldn't want even that, would you? I'd bet you'd be
> the first to whine about the lack of foriegn aid. Or the lack of some offical
> stance denouncing this or that. Stances are fine but woe be unto the person
> who wants to follow through on those stances! Oh no, that's not right! Peh.
> We never should have gone out in the first place.
I'd debate the issue, but you have your preferred view that appears to be based on a mixture of misconception and a confused perception of Europe being socialist. You obviously also appear to have no understanding of what happened in Yugoslavia. It was not a racist issue, it was similar only in the way that religion imposes paradigms of exclusion in the same way in which nationalism does.
Not a bad rant, I hope it assisted you in the appropriate level of repressional release. We could probably have a good conversation sometime, if you ever managed to get your facts straight. LOL.
Regards,
David.
Reply to: