Re: [CTRL] Nato:There is always a cost to defeat an evil.[was Waco an evil?]
-Caveat Lector- No, Howard. I didn't make the whole thing up in order to discredit libertarians. I was shocked by the radio talk show host's comments. He announced that he was a follower of Ron Paul and a champion of "free trade." Then, later in the program, he made the amazing comment that he supported Clinton's Yugoslav war. His stated reason was that Milosevic was a tyrant and presented a threat to the stability of Europe. But I found it odd that a champion of "liberty" would be supporting the indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets and what has to be a destabilization of central Europe for years to come. But why exactly must Yugoslavia be crushed by NATO and the US-EU alliance? I don't think it has anything to do with concern for Milosevic's atrocities. We're not particularly concerned about authoritarian regimes in other parts of the world... so, why Yugoslavia? It clearly relates to the US/EU plan to set up a global trading system in order to maintain the current political/economic status quo. The New World Order, our new rulers, are very concerned that the last vestiges of "socialism" be eradicated in Europe. Look at the pressure being placed on the Scandanavian countries to give up the few remaining protections they have for their workers. If they don't surrender to American and British interests, they will be economically punished. The consolidation of Europe into a tight little trading unit is essential to the overall plan of establishing global "liberty" and "free trade" for all. In order to have a global system of "free trade," national sovereignty must be abolished. After all, governments get in the way of private capital, and there's always the vague possibility that the citizens of the world might ban together to fight back against the economic predators in their midst. In order to prevent that from happening, it's important that government always serve the interests of private capital. And capital always moves in one direction: concentration. Big dog eats little dog and gets bigger, so by its very nature, capitalism must expand into every corner of the world. There is always the thorny problem of overproduction...the constant search for new markets and new populations to exploit. The logic of the capitalistic system is not competitive...it's monopolistic. Big dog must get bigger and bigger. Of course, there are pluses and minuses to this dynamic. The creative potential of human nature is harnessed in radical new waysbut not all of these energies are positive. They're destructive as well. In order for big dog to get bigger, a lot of people must be sacrificed to the great god Mammon. Now, interestingly, many people on the left are cheering on this dynamic...because they see the collapse of national economies and sovereign governments as a prelude to what they envision will be the creation of a dictatorship of the proletariat. Once all of us are dragged into the New World Order "free trade zone," everyone will be placed on an equal footing: we will all be reduced to serfdom, selling our wares in the "global marketplace." Some leftists look forward to this "downsizing" or great leveling of the world's population. That is why so many on the left are champions of economic integration and "free trade." Notice that Christopher Hitchens and the editors of the New Republic are ardent believers in "free trade." They see it as step forward. By collapsing national boundaries and reducing the world into trade zones...many leftists are arguing that labor should become international(remember the old slogan, workers of the world unite.) So, they're ecstatic about the prospect of economic integration. Not surprisingly, there is a strange symbiotic relationship between libertarianism and communism. Both libertarians AND communists want the dismantling of government. But they want deregulation for different reasons. Libs see it as the triumph of capital, while communists envision the collapse of national governments and national economies as a prelude for the creation of a one world government. That's why economic nationalists like Pat Buchanan are discredited. ...The New World Order plan for globalization will go forward..probably under the auspices of George Bush, Jr. in 2000. Personally, I'm an economic nationalist. I believe that government should play a role in protecting the life, liberty and well-being of its citizens from economic and political predators. I oppose libertarianism. The "movement" is using the rhetoric of "freedom" and "liberty" in order to usher in a one world government that will eventually destroy what few civil liberties (I think of them as protections...for me, protectionism is not a dirty word) we have left. As far as capitalism goes, there's nothing wrong with the free market and private wealth accumulation...as long as it doesn't present a threat to the civil liberties of all us... But the wealth accumulators are never
Re: [CTRL] Nato:There is always a cost to defeat an evil.[was Waco an evil?]
-Caveat Lector- - Original Message - From: William Hugh Tunstall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yugoslav war. His stated reason was that Milosevic was a tyrant and presented a threat to the stability of Europe. But I found it odd that a champion of "liberty" would be supporting the indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets and what has to be a destabilization of central Europe for years to come. But why exactly must Yugoslavia be crushed by NATO and the US-EU alliance? I don't think it has anything to do with concern for Milosevic's atrocities. We're not particularly concerned about authoritarian regimes in other parts of the world... so, why Yugoslavia? Let's see, a dozen or so civilian hits [bridges, hospitals, houses etc] out of the tens of thousands of sorties flown, is "indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets"?? If the intention was to target civilians, then NATO has really fucked up, eh? I mean, if *I* wanted to bomb civilians, I'd make sure every Serb town was just a smoking pile of rubble by now. NATO could re-create the Dresden fire-bombing pretty easily, with Beograd as the cinder. Has that happened yet? Why Yugoslavia, and not similar [or worse] genocides around the world? How about: because Yugoslavia is in Europe; because Yugoslavia is where the World War of this century started [phase II was just a continuation of phase I, after re-arming]; because Yugoslav disorders threaten to suck-in the surrounding countries: Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Russia, Hungary, Austria, Italy? Could these be valid factors? I think bombing for democracy, killing for peace, is like fucking for virginity. I think the NATO campaign has been a major fuck-up. The Serb regime fronted by Milosevic should have been taken out years ago, by other means. The oligarchs that support him should have had their foreign accounts frozen, their foreign properties seized. The regime should have been destabilized and discredited, like the op against Allende in Chile. Much could have been done, short of taking military action. By being forced into a position where bombing was the only seeming option, NATO strategists were especially stupid. Which just goes to show that a committee has 19 heads and no brains, eh? If there's an anti-Serb conspiracy, it's pretty incompetent. DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Nato:There is always a cost to defeat an evil.[was Waco an evil?]
-Caveat Lector- What gives us the right to kill Serbians? We're morally superior? We're a superpower and we can kill whoever we want. Serbian lives are worth less than American/NATO lives? The end (getting rid of Milosevic) justifies the means (the murder of civilians)? OKWe're bombing for reasons based on geopolitik. Milosevic is a loose cannon...a potential bad boy who will make problems for all of our "allies" in the area. So, the way to handle Milosevic is to establish a military presence in the Balkans. We'll be the cop on the beat keeping everyone from slaughtering one another. And just to make sure that everyone behaves...we'll arm everyone to the teethback one side (the Albanian "freedom fighters") rather than the wicked Serbs. Great. Sounds like a winning policy!!! I know this might seem like an absurd ideabut why don't we stay out of it and mind our own damned business. Why is it in America's longterm interests to play policeman in the Balkans? On Wed, 2 Jun 1999, Ric Carter wrote: -Caveat Lector- - Original Message - From: William Hugh Tunstall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yugoslav war. His stated reason was that Milosevic was a tyrant and presented a threat to the stability of Europe. But I found it odd that a champion of "liberty" would be supporting the indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets and what has to be a destabilization of central Europe for years to come. But why exactly must Yugoslavia be crushed by NATO and the US-EU alliance? I don't think it has anything to do with concern for Milosevic's atrocities. We're not particularly concerned about authoritarian regimes in other parts of the world... so, why Yugoslavia? Let's see, a dozen or so civilian hits [bridges, hospitals, houses etc] out of the tens of thousands of sorties flown, is "indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets"?? If the intention was to target civilians, then NATO has really fucked up, eh? I mean, if *I* wanted to bomb civilians, I'd make sure every Serb town was just a smoking pile of rubble by now. NATO could re-create the Dresden fire-bombing pretty easily, with Beograd as the cinder. Has that happened yet? Why Yugoslavia, and not similar [or worse] genocides around the world? How about: because Yugoslavia is in Europe; because Yugoslavia is where the World War of this century started [phase II was just a continuation of phase I, after re-arming]; because Yugoslav disorders threaten to suck-in the surrounding countries: Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Russia, Hungary, Austria, Italy? Could these be valid factors? I think bombing for democracy, killing for peace, is like fucking for virginity. I think the NATO campaign has been a major fuck-up. The Serb regime fronted by Milosevic should have been taken out years ago, by other means. The oligarchs that support him should have had their foreign accounts frozen, their foreign properties seized. The regime should have been destabilized and discredited, like the op against Allende in Chile. Much could have been done, short of taking military action. By being forced into a position where bombing was the only seeming option, NATO strategists were especially stupid. Which just goes to show that a committee has 19 heads and no brains, eh? If there's an anti-Serb conspiracy, it's pretty incompetent. DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
[CTRL] Nato:There is always a cost to defeat an evil.[was Waco an evil?]
-Caveat Lector- (Be Careful Brothers and Sisters, The overclass elites are using the media lords to condition our psyche in to accepting the Culture of Death; then proclaim themselves as our Protectors.) Sounds to me like Hitlerian nazism. Better learn who these people are that considers it a 'necessary price'. Of course if your a dumbed-down product of our socialist public school system, you'll think, "Who cares?". Socialism=Slavery and Death Constitutionalism=Freedom and Life We shouldn't allow the illiteracy of the many enslave the literate few! --- Monday, May 31, 1999 Published at 18:25 GMT 19:25 UK World: Europe Civilian deaths 'necessary price' Nato admits bombing bridge in Varvarin Nato says civilian casualties in Yugoslavia are the price of defeating evil, after three separate attacks in which at least 32 people are reported to have died. "There is always a cost to defeat an evil. It never comes free, unfortunately. But the cost of failure to defeat a great evil is far higher," said Nato spokesman Jamie Shea. He insisted Nato planes had bombed only "legitimate designated military targets" and if more civilians had died it was because Nato had been forced into military action. BBC's David Sillito: The number of civilian injuries continues to grow Yugoslavia says at least 20 people were killed when Nato planes hit a sanatorium and a neighbouring old people's home during a midnight raid in the town of Surdilica in south-eastern Serbia on Sunday. Another 11 are reported to have died in an attack on a bridge in Varvarin, south-central Serbia, and one person died when a bomb hit a car carrying foreign journalists. Wreckage of the bridge at Varvarin Alliance military spokesman General Konrad Freitag said Nato warplanes had successfully hit an ammunition storage depot and a military barracks in the raid on Surdulica. Nato is still investigating the claims of civilian deaths. Nato also described the attack on the bridge at Varvarin as a "designated and legitimate target". Mr Shea said: "Nato does not attack civilian targets, we attack exclusively military targets and take every precaution to avoid inflicting harm on civilians." According to Belgrade, at least 11 civilians were killed and 40 injured. Jon Leyne reports: "NATO denies allegations that its bombs are going astray" Yugoslav news agency Tanjug said the area would have been crowded with people attending the town market at 1pm local time (1100GMT) on Sunday, the time of the attack. Witnesses said four cars fell into the River Velika Morava during the first waves of attacks and rescuers who went to help victims were hit in a second wave of bombings. (Click here to see a map of latest Nato strikes) Tanjug also reported a car carrying foreign journalists in Kosovo was hit on Sunday, although Nato says there is no evidence an alliance plane was involved. Jamie Shea: We have no information so far that we were responsible The driver of the car, who was an interpreter, was killed and one British, one French and one Italian journalist had been injured, said the agency. Eve-Ann Prentice of The Times newspaper was treated in a hospital in Prizren but has since been released. Milosevic peace move Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic has confirmed he will accept the G8 principles for ending the Kosovo conflict. In a statement issued to Serbian radio, he said: "In line with our consistent policy of peace and defence of freedom, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has accepted the G8 principles and believes that the UN Security Council, in line with the UN Charter, should now make it possible with its resolution to move the solution to the crisis from the military to the political track." The US reacted with caution, saying it welcomed any positive development but it was not clear all the terms had been accepted. Michael Williams, a BBC correspondent in Belgrade, said Yugoslavia first accepted the G8 principles as a basis for negotiation some three weeks ago. But he said it was perhaps significant that the announcement had finally come from the highest echelons of government. Clinton calls for support US President Bill Clinton has urged Americans to support the Kosovo campaign. "What we are doing today will save lives, including American lives, in the future and it will give our children a better, safer world to live in," he said in his Memorial Day address. Mr Clinton said that if the United States was more heavily involved than other countries, it was because the US had a greater capacity. Jeremy Cooke reports: "The fighting threatens to spread into Albania itself" In another development, there has been upsurge in fighting between Serb forces and the Kosovo Liberation Army along the border between Kosovo and Albania. Serb shells hit an area less than a mile from the Morino crossing point used by hundreds of refugees every day. Aid
Re: [CTRL] Nato:There is always a cost to defeat an evil.[was Waco an evil?]
-Caveat Lector- Last night I had an opportunity to listen to a local radio talk program hosted by an individual who claims to be a "libertarian." Since he's a new host for the show, the regular callers were interested in his opinion on Kosovo. Strangely, this self-proclaimed "libertarian" was championing the government's policy in Kosovo I thought that this was a rather peculiar position coming from someone who claims to espouse libertarian ideals. Then, as he elaborated his position, it became clear. The war is "good" because Serbia has refused to practice "free trade." You see, if a nation insists on its right to have an economic system that is different from the "free trade system" championed by the New World Order, then, according to the host's logic, Yugoslavia's "illogical" insistence on not practicing "free trade" and signing onto the EU agenda means that its regime (and its people) should be punished. Punishment, I guess, means "humanitarian bombing." But the "libertarian" host continued to make an astonishing statement. He told his listening audience (for the most part, conservative Republicans) that a world government is not a bad thing at all. Why? Because the world government would usher in what he believed to be a libertarian utopia: businesses will dominate and control global populations...local governments will be abolishedwe will all be part of one big happy economic trading system (presumably, led by the wise men of capital)...and in this "libertarian" paradise, the rich will get richer, and the poor will be justly punished. Surprisingly, not one of the usually contentious "conservative" telephone callers seemed interested in challenging him. It was as if a thick wooly blanket had descended upon their thought processes, and I was shocked to hear some of the usually crusty "better dead than Red" patriot types agree with him. I would like some of the libertarians on the list to share their thoughts on this subject. Clearly, NATO has violated the terms of its own charter by waging war on one if its European neighbors. It's also clear that the "accidental" bombing of civilian targets is not really accidental. The NATO forces are interested in terrorizing the civilian populationperhaps, it reflects a Malthusian approach of getting rid of Europe's "useless eaters." But I'm a little perplexed why so many of the libertarian contributors to CTRL condemn these Nazi-like policies. After all, once Milosevic is gone, and NATO enjoys its "victory," the last remnants of Tito's socialist state will have been delivered into the hands of EU apparachniks working for Swiss/German/British capitalists. Many of you free marketeers should find that a heartwarming prospect. Certainly, our local talk show host certainly does. But then I began wondering if libertarianism itself might be a tool of the global elite to usher in a one world government... well...it's a possibility. Just more of the old Hegelian thesis-antithesis stuff to keep the public constantly off balance while the noose around our necks grows tighter and tighter.. hmm.. On Tue, 1 Jun 1999, Peter L. Sroufe wrote: -Caveat Lector- (Be Careful Brothers and Sisters, The overclass elites are using the media lords to condition our psyche in to accepting the Culture of Death; then proclaim themselves as our Protectors.) Sounds to me like Hitlerian nazism. Better learn who these people are that considers it a 'necessary price'. Of course if your a dumbed-down product of our socialist public school system, you'll think, "Who cares?". Socialism=Slavery and Death Constitutionalism=Freedom and Life We shouldn't allow the illiteracy of the many enslave the literate few! --- Monday, May 31, 1999 Published at 18:25 GMT 19:25 UK World: Europe Civilian deaths 'necessary price' Nato admits bombing bridge in Varvarin Nato says civilian casualties in Yugoslavia are the price of defeating evil, after three separate attacks in which at least 32 people are reported to have died. "There is always a cost to defeat an evil. It never comes free, unfortunately. But the cost of failure to defeat a great evil is far higher," said Nato spokesman Jamie Shea. He insisted Nato planes had bombed only "legitimate designated military targets" and if more civilians had died it was because Nato had been forced into military action. BBC's David Sillito: The number of civilian injuries continues to grow Yugoslavia says at least 20 people were killed when Nato planes hit a sanatorium and a neighbouring old people's home during a midnight raid in the town of Surdilica in south-eastern Serbia on Sunday. Another 11 are reported to have died in an attack on a bridge in Varvarin, south-central Serbia, and one person died when a bomb hit a car carrying foreign journalists. Wreckage of the bridge at Varvarin Alliance
Re: [CTRL] Nato:There is always a cost to defeat an evil.[was Waco an evil?]
-Caveat Lector- Without the name of the "libertarian" and the time and the station that you heard him I am forced to believe that you made the whole thing up as a means to discredit libertarianism. However, it is possible that someone might be put on the radio claiming to be a "libertarian" precisely for the reasons you mention, so I won't discount completely the possibility that you are telling the truth. And, of course, there is a possibility that someone could call himself a "libertarian" and be as muddled in thought as the person you have described. However, I have to wonder why you have not included this information in the first place. Howard Davis -- From: William Hugh Tunstall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [CTRL] Nato:"There is always a cost to defeat an evil."[was Waco an evil?] Date: Tue, Jun 1, 1999, 6:35 PM -Caveat Lector- Last night I had an opportunity to listen to a local radio talk program hosted by an individual who claims to be a "libertarian." Since he's a new host for the show, the regular callers were interested in his opinion on Kosovo. Strangely, this self-proclaimed "libertarian" was championing the government's policy in Kosovo I thought that this was a rather peculiar position coming from someone who claims to espouse libertarian ideals. Then, as he elaborated his position, it became clear. The war is "good" because Serbia has refused to practice "free trade." You see, if a nation insists on its right to have an economic system that is different from the "free trade system" championed by the New World Order, then, according to the host's logic, Yugoslavia's "illogical" insistence on not practicing "free trade" and signing onto the EU agenda means that its regime (and its people) should be punished. Punishment, I guess, means "humanitarian bombing." But the "libertarian" host continued to make an astonishing statement. He told his listening audience (for the most part, conservative Republicans) that a world government is not a bad thing at all. Why? Because the world government would usher in what he believed to be a libertarian utopia: businesses will dominate and control global populations...local governments will be abolishedwe will all be part of one big happy economic trading system (presumably, led by the wise men of capital)...and in this "libertarian" paradise, the rich will get richer, and the poor will be justly punished. Surprisingly, not one of the usually contentious "conservative" telephone callers seemed interested in challenging him. It was as if a thick wooly blanket had descended upon their thought processes, and I was shocked to hear some of the usually crusty "better dead than Red" patriot types agree with him. I would like some of the libertarians on the list to share their thoughts on this subject. Clearly, NATO has violated the terms of its own charter by waging war on one if its European neighbors. It's also clear that the "accidental" bombing of civilian targets is not really accidental. The NATO forces are interested in terrorizing the civilian populationperhaps, it reflects a Malthusian approach of getting rid of Europe's "useless eaters." But I'm a little perplexed why so many of the libertarian contributors to CTRL condemn these Nazi-like policies. After all, once Milosevic is gone, and NATO enjoys its "victory," the last remnants of Tito's socialist state will have been delivered into the hands of EU apparachniks working for Swiss/German/British capitalists. Many of you free marketeers should find that a heartwarming prospect. Certainly, our local talk show host certainly does. But then I began wondering if libertarianism itself might be a tool of the global elite to usher in a one world government... well...it's a possibility. Just more of the old Hegelian thesis-antithesis stuff to keep the public constantly off balance while the noose around our necks grows tighter and tighter.. hmm.. DECLARATION DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research
