Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Tue Jul 07, 2015 7:28 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 219 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri May 02, 2003 6:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3529
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
Jimmie, the one from Ique is a blast !   ;D

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 04, 2003 7:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3529
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
[quote author=mandlebrotblot link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=0#6 date=05/03/03 at 14:20:33]<br>Anybody that likens George W. Bush to Adolph Hitler cannot be taken seriously.  [/quote]<br><br>Just another form of dictatorship. Hopefully, the guy will be out of job when the rose dusts from Iraq will be blown away by the Economic problems the Americans are now facing.<br>But sure, Bush is not Hitler. Even though the two likes to invade a country once in a while.

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 04, 2003 2:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3529
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
[quote author=mandlebrotblot link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=0#8 date=05/04/03 at 11:57:20]<br>(1) We were attacked on 9/11/2001 by terrorist that had gained support from countries like Iraq and Afghanistan.  As a result, over 3,300 innocent lives were lost along with the US suffering a major economic blow to the economy as a result. [/quote]<br><br>Sorry to break the news, but the Iraq-Al-qaida link hasn't been proved yet. If you so believe, you believe what Bush is saying. It's your choice, not mine. I fear you're in for a ride but you're entitled to believe what you want. And the real question is "WHY do people hates America that much ?". It looks so easy for them to find 20 guys to blow themselves on 9/11 that I think we should at least question "WHY is it so easy to find people to do that ?".<br><br>[quote author=mandlebrotblot link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=0#8 date=05/04/03 at 11:57:20]<br>(2) Saddam was an evil dictator who murdered his own people for personal gain and power.  The U.S. gave Saddam ample time to spare his country of an invasion.   Did Hitler warn Poland?  [/quote]<br><br>Saddam id a US Product that went bad. Right, he was a devil ! But, as long as he was following the master's plan, nothing was really to be feared. Warning or not, an invasion is still an invasion. Where's really the difference ? And if you really do believe that US went there to "liberate" Iraqe people, well... I have to salute your 'naivety'  ;D. <br>No Saddam. No Mass destruction Weapons. No proved link to Al-Qaida. No Osama (naturally!). Nothing ! Maybe they went there for control on oil after all. Wadda ya' think ? Democracy ? Well, it has to be an "American" democracy it seems. No place for any other kind. And I fear that in the long run, it won't work. But, I may be wrong.<br><br>[quote author=mandlebrotblot link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=0#8 date=05/04/03 at 11:57:20]<br>(3) Hitler ordererd genocide for the jews, "the final solution".  Bush ordered the liberation of the Iraqi people.  [/quote]<br><br>I'm tempted to tell you to read the lyrics of 'Oh, No'. I'm tempted to think that you see Bush as a World Saviour. Well, if it makes you happy ! Hitler too thought he was some kind of saviour. A wicked one, but nonetheless a Saviour. Anyway ! It's just that the phrase "Bush ordered the liberation of Iraqi people" really made me laugh. Sorry !<br><br>[quote author=mandlebrotblot link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=0#8 date=05/04/03 at 11:57:20]<br>(4) If the Americans don't like Bush in 2004, guess what, Americans still have the right to vote him out of office, without the fear of being hunted down and shot.  That is still a democracy, not a dictatorship.[/quote]<br><br>Hopefully ! And there's more than one kind of dictatorship. Let's say Bush one is not as cruel as Hitler's. Invading a country for no reasons looks to me like one kind of dictatorship. As much as 9/11 is.<br><br>[quote author=mandlebrotblot link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=0#8 date=05/04/03 at 11:57:20]<br>Were you, jimmie d, or any of you other "liberals" disturbed by how the Clinton Administration handled Bosnia, Mozambique, or Waco?<br>Since you are from Canada, Mij, I want to thank you for your concern for the American People.  Why don't we see how this all plays out before we are so eager to rush to judgement.[/quote]<br><br>As long as there's no war involving us, I'm happy. Clinton made bad decisions. Bush is making bad decisions. Preemptive war is probably the worst one taken since a long time. Personally, I think we'll see how bad it was in the next few years. Hope I'm wrong, fear I'm right. Wait and see. Future will tell. But anyone can make his own mind.<br><br>It all comes down to "Do I believe what Bush is saying or not ?". Having lied before, and for less important matters, Bush has not gained my trust. Next president, please !

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 04, 2003 4:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3529
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
I'm not upset.  8)<br>Ok, see things your way, I'll see them mine.<br>As I said, it all boils down to "Do you believe Bush ?"<br>Well I don't. And I don't see why I should. There's not one single reason for me to believe him.<br>As for the martyrs, why don't they go more after France, or Spanish, or Italy, or Sweden, or Brasil, or Japan, or anyplace that doesn't fit their views. Why mostly USA ? A hint: there must be a reason ! I'm not saying they're acting good. I just state what I see. America, and american interests at large, is the target.<br>The quantity of what they found so far as chimical weapons was not very impressive. I thought we were in for a big arsenal. I know it doesn't take a lot, but it takes at least some. Anyway, we were trained to think of larger quantities. I wonder how many countries DON'T posses some mass weapons destruction of any kind on this planet. The key here is not that a country has weapons. Many have these weapons. The key is "What are they planning to do with it ?". So far, USA was not a target for Iraq. So, when you said that USA was endangered by Iraq, I find it very hard to believe. That is most in a Bush vein to speak that way.<br>As for the liberated Iraqe, the reporst we have so far is "Thank you Yankees, now go home". It gives the strong feeling that they want to get rid of their "liberators" as soon as possible. Ingrate ? Well, maybe but what can they do about it ? Staying too long will make things worse.<br>And I was not complaining when Clinton was in charge, so I'm not always complaining like you said. <br>And France was occupied by Germans in the Normandie days. Was Iraq occupied by another country before Americans came in ? To compare the two is a bit dishonest.<br>I won't convince you. You won't convince me. It's a draw.

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2003 8:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 3:49 pm
Posts: 1807
Location: The White Zone
What's next?  Civil war, just like in what used to be Yugoslavia after Tito died.  When the glue (dictator) that holds various peoples together that probably should have THEIR OWN countries, something has to give.  <br><br>Iraq should probably be at least 3 nations, but I saw yesterday that keeping Iraq's current borders is the plan; probably to keep Turkey happy (if them Kurds get their own country then what's gonna keep the Kurds in Turkey from seceding and joining with them).  Insisting on keeping these boundaries will prompt MORE war.<br><br>Look at what used to be Yugoslavia:  it's now Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia and Montenegro (Yugoslavia; Montenegro will probably be it's own country soon)), Macedonia, and the Kosovars will probably never be part of Serbia again and they'll be doing their own thing.  If the world insisted on keeping the boundaries of Tito's Yugoslavia intact, that region would still be at war like in 1992 with the ethnic cleansing (practiced by ALL parties) and such.<br><br>If the US is really interested in self-determination for the world's peoples, perhaps they should practise it in Iraq and let THEM decide if the current borders make any sense.<br><br>VCF

_________________
There isn't much chance that you'll get people to like you. The best that most folks can hope for is that people will put up with their shit. MTF

Revel in your otherness. MK

STILL pissed at Tipper. VCF


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2003 1:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 7:45 pm
Posts: 3529
Location: St-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada
[quote author=VCF link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=0#12 date=05/05/03 at 11:49:01]If the US is really interested in self-determination for the world's peoples, perhaps they should practise it in Iraq and let THEM decide if the current borders make any sense.<br><br>VCF[/quote]<br><br>I agree 100%. People should decide. If you can't live with your neighbours, better split than start a war. It should be done in a civilized way. Unfortunately, it's rarely the case.

_________________
No doubt, we're doomed !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 06, 2003 4:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 4:37 am
Posts: 2155
Location: belgium
[quote author=whatchamacallit link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=0#14 date=05/06/03 at 06:40:15]And in contrast to the people in Iraq (or in NAZI germany, as this seems to be a favourite reference), the US citizens live in a "free" country. Not a police state. They can speak their mind. They have civil rights. They are educated. The don't have to fear being killed because of speaking out against the government.[/quote]<br>Can they really speak their mind? I beg to differ.<br>Indeed, they are not killed or tortured. Every individual can indeed, speak his mind. <br><br>But in a strange way, kapitalism has entered the political picture and serves as a symbiotic tool for politics and vice versa.<br><br>Instead of using normal, political tools (such as arrests,  trials, etc.) the US-system has evolved in using far more sophisticated means *to get rid of* people who think otherwise. Generally speaking they are isolated economically in some sort of way. Some examples... Papers or journalists who write anti-government collums get less readers, loose money, etc, so they decide to keep their critique moderate. ... The Dixie Chicks get banned (heavy loss of income) on important radiostations. ... etc.<br><br>So, instead of a police state we have a society where the main process of general opinial decision making is dictated by market/marketing mechanisms (viewer ratings determine the income from advertising). Those same market/marketing mechanisms (e.g. financial support for campaigns, flashy political advertisment on tv, imagebuilding,...) determine who is in office. Those who are in office determine who can be judge, etc. This system supports and enhances itself day by day.<br><br>We all know the bonds with Bush and the Bush administration with large companies, financing campaigns, influencing legislation (kyoto, etc.) and the likes. <br><br>A country were things are already really over the top is Italy. There the prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, (who runs the country) owns every big media compagny, and he uses and controls this media totally for his own political benefit. He also uses his political power to enhance the power of his media. Circle closed.<br><br>Terrifying. <br><br>Beware of kapitalism intrusing the *objective* media/journalism, it leads to sloganesk, easy to sell reporting. Hence, not to the truth. Hence, to disinformation, hence to UNFREEDOM for those who are disinformed.<br> <br>

_________________
bananarama


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 06, 2003 4:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 4:37 am
Posts: 2155
Location: belgium
Moreover, have you totally forgotten of the PATRIOTIC ACTS that imply severe restrictions to people who want to utter their disagreement with US-politics, which by these laws is labeled as ANTI-patrioticsm? You can go to jail for that. <br><br>Huh. Freedom?

_________________
bananarama


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 06, 2003 11:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 4:37 am
Posts: 2155
Location: belgium
[quote author=whatchamacallit link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=15#18 date=05/07/03 at 01:52:20]And, it's not the readers that "pay" the newspapers. It's the ads. And that's where the problem is: companies don't place ads in papers that are too critical.[/quote]<br>My point exactly.<br><br>[quote author=whatchamacallit link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=15#18 date=05/07/03 at 01:52:20]Can I survive without that media coverage? Can I reach the masses? Is that important? <br>IF the artists were independent, they could keep the stations from playing their tunes. <br>Are the artists independent? Are they likely to make a stand and prohibit corrupt media to use their material, or are they in it for the money?[/quote]<br>Indeed, totally agreed... <br>Now, don't you think the fact that most artists aren't  independent, indicates a state of general UNFREEDOM - instead of the freedom you refered to in the post I first responded to?<br><br>If even the artists and journalists are bound by capitalism, marketing, pressure from the advertisement, etc, don't you think freedom of expression and freedom information is a very relative concept in the US?<br>

_________________
bananarama


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 9:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 3:49 pm
Posts: 1807
Location: The White Zone
I STILL don't trust that henpecked goody-two shoes freedom-hating censor of artists Al Gore.  I hope that his political career is over and that he thinks twice before buying the soundtrack to an R-rated movie for his eight-year-old grandchildren.  His "victim" daughter who was SUBJECTED to Prince's singing about masturbation is now an adult; I hope she never discovers the joys . . . uhmm, I mean the sin for which she'll be sentenced to eternal damnation . . . of diddling herself.  How square are HER kids gonna be?<br><br>NEVER FORGET.<br><br>VCF

_________________
There isn't much chance that you'll get people to like you. The best that most folks can hope for is that people will put up with their shit. MTF

Revel in your otherness. MK

STILL pissed at Tipper. VCF


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 11:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 4:37 am
Posts: 2155
Location: belgium
[quote author=mandlebrotblot link=board=general;num=1051920098;start=15#21 date=05/07/03 at 10:02:48]Would you mind telling me a better alternative to capitalism and democracy.  Please don't list socialism and communism as one of those alternatives without a good argument for that.[/quote]<br><br>I am not a communist, not in a long shot, but I support some of the marxist analysis, I only don't think communism is the answer. Nor is severe socialism.<br><br>What would I propose? The basics of our present day system are okay, but there should be a bit more regulation & fine-tuning. What do I mean? More strict laws concerning party-financing, etc. Same goes for a better balanced social security everywhere, better balanced trade between north-south, etc. <br><br>On how to tackle capitalism invading journalism I don't have any answers - which was my main point in the post of course. But anyhow, the fact that I can't come up with an alternative just like that doesn't refute my critique. It is valid, and we all know that. <br>

_________________
bananarama


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2003 1:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2002 12:09 pm
Posts: 2476
Location: arse
the thing about more regulation BB is this - if politicians are beholded to big business ( and in ways not just related to party fianance ) and politicians do the regulating then doesnt it stand to reason that they will regulate in favour of big business ?<br><br>and then theres regulation in favour of the latest scam, health scare , eco disaster , piece of quack research all of which are seized upon and persued by special interest groups / politicians with their own personal agendas - all this makes for masses of dumb freedom restricting legislation.<br><br>i dont agree with that approach, nanny government cant lesislate the world a better place and it usually makes things a whole lot worse for everybody ( with a few notable exceptions ) .in the greater scheme of things NO government ever made a real beneficial difference to much - regular people did off their own backs.<br><br>mungo <br> <br>

_________________
Drink..............it provokes the desire, but it takes away the performance


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 219 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Caputh, lapsed maps, Mr. Nice Guy and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group