A lap around "The Ring"

rmagruder wrote:
> I also don't feel like getting into a debate about whether a cloudless
> sky is really blue. Some things just aren't worth investing the effort
> into.

No-one is saying the sky has disappeared.

If you dropped an egg on the floor and there was no shell as you cleaned
it up, I'm guess you'd be fine with that.

Don't ever question your government, there's a good citizen.

rmagruder wrote:
>>>Should it be any surprise that Dick Cheney stated the war on terror
>
> could last fifty years or more?>>
>
> I wasn't aware that Dick Cheney launched the attacks on 9/11 (or is
> that a conspiracy you also hold?)

Sorry, Randy, straw man argument.

Cheney said it - do you agree or disagree? I made no allegation about
him and 9/11, so why are you trying to put down an argument I never made?

> I realize you don't live in the USA, but I'm wondering just what civil
> liberties you claim we've lost? Can you name even a single case where
> some innocent American has lost any civil rights because of this
> administration?

Well, far be it from me to comment on your laws, but Amendment IV says;

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,
supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place
to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized"

The Patriot Act (LOL, well named) allows the police to come into your
home, search, leave without telling you. The Federal Intelligence
Surveillance Act allows warrants from special courts, looking into such
ridiculous items as what library books were read, again without
notification.

Just a couple of example of new laws trampling all over just one
amendment to your bill of rights. We're no better off over here
unfortunately.

>>>Our own corporations kill more every year in the name of profit,
>
> peddling tobacco and fat/sugar laden crap for the populace to later die
> from.
>
> And undboutedly they are over here forcing our mouths open and making
> us eat every bite. They are just coming into our homes at dinner times
> and prying open our mouths and murdering us. Every seller needs a
> buyer. Not sure why you remove free choice from the equation. You're
> not one of those victim mentality types who think that we aren't
> responsible for anything we do, that we're all just victims of
> corporations? Sounds kinda like you are...

I have no victim mentality - I make sure I'm not a victim. The point is
that "free choice" is a myth for the most part.

Okay, let's take just an example. I show you succulent chicken, couple
of bucks, "special offer" tasty chicken breast. You might buy it. If I
told you the chicken came from Indonesia, was shipped via Holland where
it was injected with 50% water to make it bigger, injected with collagen
to hold the water, injected with pig DNA to retain the collagen, and
processed in filthy water to remove feathers etc, and had a high
probability to be infected with campylobacter....would you still buy it?
How about if you were moslem, and hadn't been given the information you
were actually eating pig?

Fact is that it probably is (more than 80% of the world's chicken comes
from three companies, much of it processed in this way). You have the
"free choice" to buy this, but you are usually not furnished with the
full facts with which to properly exercise that free choice.

> What left wing web site did you get those figures from? And what did
> you do to ensure that the figures were indeed accurate?

The "left wing" website of the United Nations. From your government.
From my government. From journalist reports. From news. It's almost 11
million children per year, and a very widely known statistic. I suggest
you contact those organisations and let them know you dispute it.

>>>Iraqi children are dying from cancers caused by OUR depleted uranium
> shells
>
> I'll be looking for your objective citation backing this up as well.

I know you can use Google....

http://www.google.co.uk/search?compl...e+Search&meta=

> Hey Saddam managed to buy weaponry from the French and Russians during
> the embargo...why didn't he buy medicine if the 'evil' US and Britain
> were stopping him.

You may say he bought weapons, but since we failed to find any I don't
think we can say this with any certainty. Or do you think he just let
his children die to teach us a lesson? Or to boost his popularity?

> I'm sure the French and Russians would have happily
> sold some to him for the proper oil-for-food profits to corrupt
> individuals (why is it that the left never acknowledges that the
> French, Russians and Germans were on the take from Saddam, and that
> Saddam's oil-for-food money was not getting to his own population - but
> I suppose you'll just deny that, too).

The oil-for-food "profits" went first of all to Kuwait (one of the
richest countries in the world) as compensation for war damage. A third
of the money went to pay UN "expenses" (I thought we paid out of tax,
but there you go), further money goes to Kuwait as mentioned, further
money goes as compensation to oil and other companies. and with the
remainder Iraq would tender on the international markets for food,
medical supplies etc - every contract then had to be approved by the UN
sanctions committee. From August 1990, for eight months, ALL IMPORTS
were banned, including food and medicine, despite these being explicitly
allowed under resolution 661.

Have you heard of Denis Halliday? He was the Assistant Secretary-General
of the UN, and resigned over the sanctions. He said "I had been
instructed to implement a policy that satisfies the definition of
genocide: a deliberate policy that has deliberately killed over a
million individuals".

His successor, Hans von Spooneck, calculated the oil-for-food money, and
after paying Kuwait, the UN, oil companies etc, Iraq was left with $100
for each citizen....per YEAR. That money has to pay also for
infrastructure including oil, water, electricity etc. After that he also
called the sanctions "genocide".

But hey, it's a million Iraqis dying, so it doesn't matter...right?

Mitch_A wrote:
> This one little sentence speaks volumes and shows us exactly who John
> Wallace is. And what an ugly view it is....
>
> Stalin and Saddam both hero's while GW is the anti-christ?
>
> Sad..
>
> Mitch

Mitch, you have *NO* idea what I said, so how can your response even
begin to make sense?

My comment was in no means any form of endorsement of Stalin - it simply
alluded to a very famous quote of his. If you don't understand what I
write, at least give me the respect of not turning my words into what
you wished they meant.

JP wrote:
> "John Wallace" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Randy Magruder wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I'm continually baffled that you can't grasp the simple concept of
>>>innocence and guilt. What crime has Terri Schaivo commited that earns
>>>her a death penalty? What crime is an unborn infant guilty of? I'm
>>>not sure why the concept of not punishing the innocent is so baffling
>>>to you...but that will remain one of the mysteries of life.
>>
>>So I presume you stood against Madelaine Albright's view that the
>>killing of half a million children in Iraq was "a price worth paying"?
>>Terri Schiavo, in comparison, is not even worthy of mention.
>>
>>Sometimes Stalin really did say it best
>
>
>
> Cite for the Albright quote ?

Interview with Lesley Stahl on CBS "we think the price is worth it".

Stephen F. wrote:

>>I openly weep for the evolution of our species. So you're telling me that
>>as I sit at the lights in my Lancia Delta Integrale, your average
>>knuckle-scraping, SUV-driving, Bush-voting moron is going to think *he*
>>has the automotive class, and *I* have the "Elvis on velvet"?

> Then again, those in the know would probably still shake their head and
> wonder why you would put up with such a tempermental car.

You're probably right. Used to have an HF Integrale Turbo, and the turbo
once caught fire while cruising throught the streets of a small town
(after, I must say, a wild cross-country blast). It wasn't funny at the
time, racing for some water with flames licking out the bonnet, but it
must have looked ridiculous to those watching!

I got rid of it soon afterwards....

JP wrote:
> "JP" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"John Wallace" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>Randy Magruder wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I'm continually baffled that you can't grasp the simple concept of
>>>>innocence and guilt. What crime has Terri Schaivo commited that earns
>>>>her a death penalty? What crime is an unborn infant guilty of? I'm
>>>>not sure why the concept of not punishing the innocent is so baffling
>>>>to you...but that will remain one of the mysteries of life.
>>>
>>>So I presume you stood against Madelaine Albright's view that the
>>>killing of half a million children in Iraq was "a price worth paying"?
>>>Terri Schiavo, in comparison, is not even worthy of mention.
>>>
>>>Sometimes Stalin really did say it best
>>
>>
>> Cite for the Albright quote ?
>
>
>
>
> Didn't think so. Figures.

It's now posted - sorry my life got in the way of your predjudice.

It takes two seconds on Google to find anything - you could have easily
found it yourself. Are people soooooo comfortable in their predjudice
that they won't even challenge their own ideas? I constantly challenge
mine, and despair for the human race if we ever give that up.

Asgeir Nesoen wrote:
> Now, instead of being blind and deaf, why don't you listen to what John
> actually said? He said: "Sometimes Stalin really did say it best".
>
> I am sure Stalin said a lot of good things, and he may even have put it
> well. But that doesn't make him a better person, of course, but that was
> never the intention of john's either.
>
> Some people hear "Stalin", and their petty minds start shortcutting and
> sizzle, and their minds just produce crap and ********.

Thank you. You got my point.

The Stali quote to which I was alluding was "A single death is a
tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." So Terry Shiavo is a tragedy
and a media frenzy, but we don't give a rat's ass about a million Iraqis.

Sad, but true.

JP wrote:

> To bad Iraq invaded Kuwait then, eh ? Never would have happened if not.

To <sic> bad the CIA put the Ba'ath party and Saddam Hussein in power
then, eh? Then you wouldn't have paid to put him in power, and paid for
two wars to get him out.

Sorry about the zillions of Iraqi's that died in all the CIA/Hussein
shenanigans, collateral damage is unavoidable though

Dave Henrie wrote:

> The fact you seem to admire him Ziggy...is frightening.

Dave, please can you explain to me how citing a very famous quote of
Stalin's which fits a context, can be interpreted that the person is a
raving commie?

You should join the CIA - you may in fact be a touch overqualified.

Asgeir Nesoen wrote:
> I know that the US generally think that the high oil prices are OPEC's
> fault, yes. But it is not. And it is soooo pathetic watching the
> brooding and pouting: "They won't pump enough oil so that we can use
> *way, *way* more than we have ourselves for the prices that we want.
> Booohoooooooo!"
>
> JFYI, this is just the lovely, lovely mechanisms of capitalism: Demand
> and Availability. LOL!!!
>
> I eagerly await the times when oil is so expensive that you americans
> will have to let your SUV in the garage and take the bus to work. I
> *eagerly* await it! And it is not that far off in the future either!!!
>
> Gas prices are escalating as well, and have reached a point in US where
> people start converting to other heating sources. However, this is not
> OPEC's fault, simply because they don't control the market. The prices
> get high because everyone needs it, there is less and less of it, and US
> is the biggest consumer on the planet. And while you americans are
> concerned with your oil prices, this planet goes to rot, and you ignore
> the facts like ignorant heedless children do.

Amen, well said.

Ram the free market down everyone's throat, then scream and moan when
supply and demand pushed oil over $1/gallon. (Then just "fix it" by
invading Iraq, Iran (oops, sorry, not yet), change Afghanistan
government, etc.

By the way, when you guys go to invade Iran, I'm *really, really* sorry
about all the chemical weapons we Brits sold them. Just in case that is
used as a justification (WMDs and all that), we sold them to Iram after
(9/11). I know Bush was talking about "axis of evil" and all that, but
money is money, y'know...