Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
Mr Donald wrote... A claim that presupposes that the west is just as totalitarian as its enemies, that well known reality is not to be trusted, that newsmen and historians are servants of the vast capitalist conspiracy, so in place of obvious truths, we can substitute any ridiculous fantasy that we find politically conforting, for example Tyler Durden's fantasy that the US attacked Korea, and attacked to impose poverty on Koreans so that the US can be rich Once again you make the mistake that, because YOU are drinking from a spigot of hype, that because I disagree with you I must be drinking from some other spigot. There are plenty of counter-examples to the benefits of US interventionism, particularly throughout central America. But I don't really want to debate that point, but instead focus on Iraq. In Iraq this philosophy of saving the locals from tyrrany has taken a new turn. In this case, I actually believe that George W, Dick Cheney and the whole cabal believe that: 1. The best thing for the Iraqis would be a western-style free-market economy. (Check?) 2. An Iraqi free market would slowly stabilise the whole middle east region. (Check?) 3. Iraq has resources (ie, oil) that could be utilized to kick-start a true industrialized economy (Check?) 4. The US has the ability to extract that oil and then turn those dollars into local goods-and-services, thus kickstarting forementioned Iraqi industrialization (Check?) 5. Meanwhile, Saddam was really, really bad and a terrorist and he's got all sorts of scary WMDs. 6. It is therefore in everybody's best interests for the US to kick out Saddam and get this party started. 7. Oh, and the US will benefit too (as we should) as we help ole' man Iraq get back on his feet. But apparently, the locals are not particularly happy about the unilateral decisions we've been making in their benefit. Of course, you might chalk this up to fanaticism/Islam or whatever, but I suspect they just don't trust us (Abu Ghraib), and remember the fact that it was the US that propped up Saddam as long as he stuck to the script. Who knows? If Bush Co are able to steal this election, maybe in a year or two (after the death toll hits the 5 digit mark) we'll start hearing about how Saddam wasn't so bad after all, and why don't we give him a second chance? (We'll watch him closely, so don't you worry!) -TD --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG AErjoTRu9URKg4L+F5xjlOq35GQBD2reuyMhDJ5b 46ur5/+9ZCqnZu8EDgtmmeUH93ImKPyfT6+Pj/QUE _ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
On Tue, 2004-10-26 at 21:10 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: -- James A. Donald: Moral equivalence, the rationale of those who defend tyranny and slavery. Roy M. Silvernail Moral superiority, the rationale of both sides of any given violent conflict. The winner gets to use the victory to proclaim the correctness of their interpretation. A claim that presupposes that the west is just as totalitarian as its enemies, that well known reality is not to be trusted, that newsmen and historians are servants of the vast capitalist conspiracy, No claim in evidence. Just the observation that any justificaton for a violent conflict is necessarily subjective. -- Roy M. Silvernail is [EMAIL PROTECTED], and you're not It's just this little chromium switch, here. - TFS SpamAssassin-procmail-/dev/null-bliss http://www.rant-central.com
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- James A. Donald: Moral equivalence, the rationale of those who defend tyranny and slavery. Roy M. Silvernail Moral superiority, the rationale of both sides of any given violent conflict. The winner gets to use the victory to proclaim the correctness of their interpretation. A claim that presupposes that the west is just as totalitarian as its enemies, that well known reality is not to be trusted, that newsmen and historians are servants of the vast capitalist conspiracy, so in place of obvious truths, we can substitute any ridiculous fantasy that we find politically conforting, for example Tyler Durden's fantasy that the US attacked Korea, and attacked to impose poverty on Koreans so that the US can be rich, or the widely popular fantasy that the CIA trained Osama Bin Laden. Seeing as Bin Laden's contribution to the revolutionary war against the Soviets was merely roadbuilding, did they train him in roadbuilding? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG AErjoTRu9URKg4L+F5xjlOq35GQBD2reuyMhDJ5b 46ur5/+9ZCqnZu8EDgtmmeUH93ImKPyfT6+Pj/QUE
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
At 9:10 PM -0700 10/26/04, James A. Donald wrote: fantasy that the US attacked Korea, and attacked to impose poverty on Koreans so that the US can be rich, This is actually the running fantasy in Marxism since the 1950's, when it turned out that that, instead of the workers eating the bourgeoisie by the firelight or some Glorious Revolution or another, would instead be come bourgeoisie themselves. So, seeing their utter failure to create workers paradise in the industrial West, they decided to change their unit of analysis from people to nation-states. Of course, India, various parts of broken up legislated or forcibly-conquered pseudostates, like Slovenia, the Baltics, even Mongolia and China itself, have shown that capitalism -- Marx's word for economics, or markets, or individual freedom depending on your scale of analysis -- has the same effect there that it did in the US and Europe in the 1950's. Or the 1850's, for that matter. Marxists, and their fellow-travellers of all dilutions, from actual card-carriers to liberals in the US are such worthess assholes, and such state-is-a-person analyses are so much projectile excrement from same. Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Roy M. Silvernail wrote: On Tue, 2004-10-26 at 21:10 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: -- James A. Donald: Moral equivalence, the rationale of those who defend tyranny and slavery. Roy M. Silvernail Moral superiority, the rationale of both sides of any given violent conflict. The winner gets to use the victory to proclaim the correctness of their interpretation. A claim that presupposes that the west is just as totalitarian as its enemies, that well known reality is not to be trusted, that newsmen and historians are servants of the vast capitalist conspiracy, No claim in evidence. Just the observation that any justificaton for a violent conflict is necessarily subjective. It does not have to be *true*, you just have to get others to believe it. Of course, the current administration has been handing them example after example to point to to make the point... -- chown -R us ./base
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
From: R.A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Oct 27, 2004 9:37 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity) .. This is actually the running fantasy in Marxism since the 1950's, when it turned out that that, instead of the workers eating the bourgeoisie by the firelight or some Glorious Revolution or another, would instead be come bourgeoisie themselves. I think this bit gets at the heart of why the Islamic fundamentalists are hard to deal with. For most people I know, some notion of peace and prosperity is the thing we want from our governments. Different people differ on how to do that (like, whether the government should employ most of the doctors or the teachers), but that's the kind of goal that makes sense. And that's largely what the West has to offer. Not membership in a master race, or a date with destiny, or as vision of yourself as part of a great, centuries-old Jihad, but safe streets, working sewers, functioning markets, and a rising tide that promises to life all boats eventually, so that one day, your poor people, like ours, will be overweight from spending too much time sitting in front of the TV in an air conditioned room. The Islamic fundamentalists can't offer that. A country run by these guys is just not going to be in the forefront of technology, its economy will grow slowly, and it's likely to always be close to going to war with some infidels around it. No peace, not much prosperity, but a lot of capital-P Purpose. A place in history, a part of the Jihad. In this sense, it's a lot like Marxism was, back when it had serious adherents; it's a mass movement, like Eric Hoffer talks about. What Hayek called the liberal order (e.g., working minimal government, liberal democracy, rule of law) can't offer any of that. It offers safe streets and working sewers and peace and prosperity, but you have to come up with your own purpose. The irony is that the neocons seemed to be trying to build up a kind of mass movement mentality in the US, which clearly has caught George Bush and his top advisors--this wonderful notion that we're going to go out and civilize these heathens, bring them democracy and free markets, and then they'll stop wanting to be part of crazy mass movements that tell them to strap dynamite to themselves and blow up bus stops full of people. This seems doomed to fail. A lot of people in the Middle East clearly want what we're selling, but it doesn't take many suicide bombers to make that sort of thing break down. --John
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- R.A. Hettinga This is actually the running fantasy in Marxism since the 1950's, when it turned out that that, instead of the workers eating the bourgeoisie by the firelight or some Glorious Revolution or another, would instead be come bourgeoisie themselves. John Kelsey I think this bit gets at the heart of why the Islamic fundamentalists are hard to deal with. For most people I know, some notion of peace and prosperity is the thing we want from our governments. [...] The Islamic fundamentalists can't offer that. [...] No peace, not much prosperity, but a lot of capital-P Purpose. A place in history, a part of the Jihad. In this sense, it's a lot like Marxism was, back when it had serious adherents; it's a mass movement, like Eric Hoffer talks about. Mass movements of this kind require the promise of inevitable victory. When communism suffered one decisive, uncomplicated, unambiguous defeat, the dominos fell one after another all the way to Moscow. The remaining communists have made some psychological recovery - see for example Tyler Durden's peculiar version of recent history, where in his universe the communists actually won and are still winning, and similarly the Islamists have made a considerable psychological recovery from Afghanistan, but the ideal of date with destiny tends to lose its appeal when you keep picking yourself off the dirt with a bloody nose. In Iraq we face a guerrila movement, and discover, yet again, that guerrilas can only be defeated by local forces - and the boys from Baghdad are not all that local. This gives the Islamicists renewed hope. So what do you do, if, like Israel, you face terrorists embedded in a local population that supports thems sufficiently they can melt into the people? Withdrawal did not work, for the terrorists keep sending car bombs and the like from their stronghold, as in Fallujah. What worked in Afghanistan was to find some local warlord we could live with, someone in no hurry to get his six pack of virgins, someone who might want to put sacks over the heads of the women of his town, but had no grandiose ambitions to stuff all the women of the world into bags, and then we cut a deal with him - we help him his slay his enemies, he helps us slay our enemies. Unfortunately the US plan to bring democracy to the middle east, and to preserve Iraq as a unitary state, keeps getting in the way of this sort of deal. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG o32eoG4KhmccNjDBkOW9upEtn8Lka3zsooGJn8lY 4dMgCNOmt5z/S3km7vma/L6RECrRaVEmnhEZ4E2hb
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
John Kelsey wrote... The irony is that the neocons seemed to be trying to build up a kind of mass movement mentality in the US, which clearly has caught George Bush and his top advisors--this wonderful notion that we're going to go out and civilize these heathens, bring them democracy and free markets, and then they'll stop wanting to be part of crazy mass movements that tell them to strap dynamite to themselves and blow up bus stops full of people. This seems doomed to fail. A lot of people in the Middle East clearly want what we're selling, but it doesn't take many suicide bombers to make that sort of thing break down. Let's remember that any regime is only temporary, no matter how fundamentalist. The main flaw in the whole save the world logic is that it assumes that some regime (Islamist, Communist or whatever) would actually be able to hold on to everybody in perpetuity, and I think history is now at the point where we have a good indication that this ain't the case. In the case of China, Vietnam and, to some extent, the Islamists, I don't get the impression that a hatred of free markets was he underlying reason for the adoption of commusim (or whatever). Communism was merely a political pole that could be held on to so as to crystallize a movement whereby outside influences could be pushed out, and then the internal issues resolved. I would argue that the more we proclaim ourselves to be the evanglists for free markets throughout the world, and then ram our cocks up Abu Ghraib inmates asses, to the same extent what we have to offer looks tainted and foul. They need to puish us out so they need to reject free markets. They need to reject free markets so a new pole is created. Mr Donald woul think that I argue against free markets, but instead what I am arguing against is methodology which retards free markets. -TD _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- On 27 Oct 2004 at 9:55, Tyler Durden wrote: There are plenty of counter-examples to the benefits of US interventionism, particularly throughout central America. We saw that when the Soviet Union fell, the US lost interest in central America, and peace and democracy broke out in central America with the victory of those forces that had formerly received US backing, and the defeat of those forces that had formerly received Soviet backing, showing that US meddling in central America, was, as it was claimed to be, a defensive response to Soviet meddling, a defensive response that had the support of the people of central America, and that the suffering of central America was in substantial part caused by Soviet meddling. But apparently, the locals are not particularly happy about the unilateral decisions we've been making in their benefit. Of course, you might chalk this up to fanaticism/Islam or whatever, but I suspect they just don't trust us (Abu Ghraib), Sure they don't trust us, but observe that in the Afghan election, Karzai got 56% of the vote, and the soft-on-the-taliban guys got much the same vote as the supposed representatives of the oppressed masses in Central America - down in the asterixes. I predict a very similar election outcome in Iraq. Sadr may get a dangerously large vote, possibly as large as the Nazis got in the Weimar republic, but anyone who looks aligned with the car bombers will be down in the asterixes. and remember the fact that it was the US that propped up Saddam as long as he stuck to the script. Another tale from your odd parallel universe where the US attacked Korea. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG zEWlCJhdBBReeJ2Tnl5midyyezqcb0uz+y18EzpX 4OAEBY/Hw5iw7juSxIfTFKJsXQRt7junqQKOiLZ07
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
The remaining communists have made some psychological recovery - see for example Tyler Durden's peculiar version of recent history, where in his universe the communists actually won and are still winning, Again, you live in a world that's evenly divided between black and white. Since I'm not white you figure I must be black. To reiterate a point your world view does not seem prepared to understand, communism (like Whabism these days) is a fleeting ideological counter-pole to the perceived evils of America and capitalism. To make an analogy, let's say someone on the street tried to force-feed you the most healthy food in the world at gun point. There's a good chance that, after that, you will not eat that healthy food any longer because you perceive it to be evil. Likewise with Imperliasm and free markets: The more we try to shove it down the throats of the Islamic world the more they will reject both us as well as whatever we're trying to give 'em. -TD From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 10:41:39 -0700 -- R.A. Hettinga This is actually the running fantasy in Marxism since the 1950's, when it turned out that that, instead of the workers eating the bourgeoisie by the firelight or some Glorious Revolution or another, would instead be come bourgeoisie themselves. John Kelsey I think this bit gets at the heart of why the Islamic fundamentalists are hard to deal with. For most people I know, some notion of peace and prosperity is the thing we want from our governments. [...] The Islamic fundamentalists can't offer that. [...] No peace, not much prosperity, but a lot of capital-P Purpose. A place in history, a part of the Jihad. In this sense, it's a lot like Marxism was, back when it had serious adherents; it's a mass movement, like Eric Hoffer talks about. Mass movements of this kind require the promise of inevitable victory. When communism suffered one decisive, uncomplicated, unambiguous defeat, the dominos fell one after another all the way to Moscow. The remaining communists have made some psychological recovery - see for example Tyler Durden's peculiar version of recent history, where in his universe the communists actually won and are still winning, and similarly the Islamists have made a considerable psychological recovery from Afghanistan, but the ideal of date with destiny tends to lose its appeal when you keep picking yourself off the dirt with a bloody nose. In Iraq we face a guerrila movement, and discover, yet again, that guerrilas can only be defeated by local forces - and the boys from Baghdad are not all that local. This gives the Islamicists renewed hope. So what do you do, if, like Israel, you face terrorists embedded in a local population that supports thems sufficiently they can melt into the people? Withdrawal did not work, for the terrorists keep sending car bombs and the like from their stronghold, as in Fallujah. What worked in Afghanistan was to find some local warlord we could live with, someone in no hurry to get his six pack of virgins, someone who might want to put sacks over the heads of the women of his town, but had no grandiose ambitions to stuff all the women of the world into bags, and then we cut a deal with him - we help him his slay his enemies, he helps us slay our enemies. Unfortunately the US plan to bring democracy to the middle east, and to preserve Iraq as a unitary state, keeps getting in the way of this sort of deal. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG o32eoG4KhmccNjDBkOW9upEtn8Lka3zsooGJn8lY 4dMgCNOmt5z/S3km7vma/L6RECrRaVEmnhEZ4E2hb _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
Inadvertent Iraqi anarchocapitalism (Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity))
At 10:41 AM -0700 10/27/04, James A. Donald wrote: What worked in Afghanistan was to find some local warlord we could live with, someone in no hurry to get his six pack of virgins, someone who might want to put sacks over the heads of the women of his town, but had no grandiose ambitions to stuff all the women of the world into bags, and then we cut a deal with him - we help him his slay his enemies, he helps us slay our enemies. Unfortunately the US plan to bring democracy to the middle east, and to preserve Iraq as a unitary state, keeps getting in the way of this sort of deal. Except, apparently, in Iraqi Kurdistan: http://www.livejournal.com/users/giantlaser/58953.html Wherein Ryan Lackey's boss has left Baghdad for a nice hotel upstate... :-) Ryan, apparently remains downtown where all the fun is... http://www.livejournal.com/users/giantlaser/59447.html page down to see Ryan in all his former dry-suited Sealand glory... I recommend Tyler http://www.livejournal.com/users/giantlaser/ and Jayme's http://www.livejournal.com/users/slownewsday/ Iraq Livejournal blogs as a wonderful example of inadvertant anarchocapitalism in action. Inadvertent, because, of course, they *really* wanna be statists, liberal ones in fact, in spite of evidence all around them to the contrary. I still think they're heroes. Hell, as far as I'm concerned, *Ryan's* a hero at this point. Nick Berg lives. Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- James A. Donald: The remaining communists have made some psychological recovery - see for example Tyler Durden's peculiar version of recent history, where in his universe the communists actually won and are still winning, Tyler Durden Again, you live in a world that's evenly divided between black and white. Since I'm not white you figure I must be black. Whatever you are, you have told us a story of the world where the Koreans bravely repelled the evil capitalist American attack, and enjoyed prosperity and progress thereby. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG EqHk0rek72pGIAIvZCiBmJDtn1yvQHDXnJ/0n/ks 4jknM3llghisRUJE2X+8tiw6yn8yqEdesC8+Fy4HC
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
Well, perhaps your comment was made entirely toungue-in-cheek, but I still think you're missing the point. The point is this: Almost and side in this world that has committed or commits atrocities can find a true-believing apolegist. And in most cases the best of these can concoct an answer to anything you throw at him. As far as I'm concerned, that's the whole point of going through this excersize (ie, of finding a way to rationalize pretty much ANY form of violence/terrorism.) The danger comes when a nation (ie, the guys who control the guns) is run by the apolegists, or people who hold similar viewpoints. Put in another way, just because you really really REALLY believe you are right doesn't give anyone the right to create huge amounts of turmoil and death in someone else's country. -TD From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:59:56 -0700 -- J.A. Terranson: So if I was to go out tomorrow and spread 2000 curies of Ci into the local subway system As payback for Ruby Ridge, this would not be an act of terrorism? James A. Donald: That would be terrorism, because regardless of what you *said* your intent was, you would not be targeting those responsible for Ruby Ridge. J.A. Terranson: And if the station I chose just happened to be the one servicing ATF? If your intent was to nail passing BATF employees, surely hitting closer to their office would be more effectual. Spray some radioactives in the entrance lobby. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG KWVunJBmZ52AZSOdaQb2Q5Zoz2Crn5g0U31NRSlo 4iLTYoVpo0AgmiEow46ObxjN4dPkqPP6I0kKDTG+9 _ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- On 25 Oct 2004 at 21:03, Tyler Durden wrote: The point is this: Almost and side in this world that has committed or commits atrocities can find a true-believing apolegist. Moral equivalence, the rationale of those who defend tyranny and slavery. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 9UPtpcIvFgtu2JFnBNLIA/QPpXk7MkK68mtvmQya 45I4CX0wox3d7YrExie7R1Q+2YFGk2ao4amh5DlM6
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
Moral equivalence, the rationale of those who defend tyranny and slavery. Exactly. -TD --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 9UPtpcIvFgtu2JFnBNLIA/QPpXk7MkK68mtvmQya 45I4CX0wox3d7YrExie7R1Q+2YFGk2ao4amh5DlM6 _ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
At 6:23 PM -0400 10/26/04, Roy M. Silvernail wrote: Moral superiority, the rationale of both sides of any given violent conflict. The winner gets to use the victory to proclaim the correctness of their interpretation. When the conflict is of a historic scale, the loser is often too dead to object. ..and your point is? :-). Same as it ever was, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
On Tue, 2004-10-26 at 14:19 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: Moral equivalence, the rationale of those who defend tyranny and slavery. Moral superiority, the rationale of both sides of any given violent conflict. The winner gets to use the victory to proclaim the correctness of their interpretation. When the conflict is of a historic scale, the loser is often too dead to object. -- Roy M. Silvernail is [EMAIL PROTECTED], and you're not It's just this little chromium switch, here. - TFS SpamAssassin-procmail-/dev/null-bliss http://www.rant-central.com
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
On Tue, 2004-10-26 at 18:38 -0400, R.A. Hettinga wrote: At 6:23 PM -0400 10/26/04, Roy M. Silvernail wrote: Moral superiority, the rationale of both sides of any given violent conflict. The winner gets to use the victory to proclaim the correctness of their interpretation. When the conflict is of a historic scale, the loser is often too dead to object. ...and your point is? Oh, sorry... I thought we were stating and restating the very obvious. Same as it ever was, Indeed. -- Roy M. Silvernail is [EMAIL PROTECTED], and you're not It's just this little chromium switch, here. - TFS SpamAssassin-procmail-/dev/null-bliss http://www.rant-central.com
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: James A. Donald: McViegh did not target innocents. Bin Laden did target innocents. Roy M. Silvernail I'm confused. Is Mr. Donald saying McVeigh did not surveil his target sufficiently to know that there was a day care center in the damage pattern? Bin Laden's intent was to make anyone in America afraid - thus the use of airliners, rather than truck bombs. McViegh's intent was to make BATF afraid. This is idiotic. You're claiming that the definition of terrorist is dependent not on the act, but on why the act was committed. So if I was to go out tomorrow and spread 2000 curies of Ci into the local subway system As payback for Ruby Ridge, this would not be an act of terrorism? You're a fucking moron. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0xBD4A95BF An ill wind is stalking while evil stars whir and all the gold apples go bad to the core S. Plath, Temper of Time
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: James A. Donald: Bin Laden's intent was to make anyone in America afraid - thus the use of airliners, rather than truck bombs. McViegh's intent was to make BATF afraid. J.A. Terranson: This is idiotic. You're claiming that the definition of terrorist is dependent not on the act, but on why the act was committed. Analogously, the definition of murderer depends on why the act was committed. So if I was to go out tomorrow and spread 2000 curies of Ci into the local subway system As payback for Ruby Ridge, this would not be an act of terrorism? That would be terrorism, because regardless of what you *said* your intent was, you would not be targeting those responsible for Ruby Ridge. And if the station I chose just happened to be the one servicing ATF? -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0xBD4A95BF An ill wind is stalking while evil stars whir and all the gold apples go bad to the core S. Plath, Temper of Time
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- James A. Donald: Bin Laden's intent was to make anyone in America afraid - thus the use of airliners, rather than truck bombs. McViegh's intent was to make BATF afraid. J.A. Terranson: This is idiotic. You're claiming that the definition of terrorist is dependent not on the act, but on why the act was committed. Analogously, the definition of murderer depends on why the act was committed. So if I was to go out tomorrow and spread 2000 curies of Ci into the local subway system As payback for Ruby Ridge, this would not be an act of terrorism? That would be terrorism, because regardless of what you *said* your intent was, you would not be targeting those responsible for Ruby Ridge. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG VD3OmstfdjDi423472WFnOcF4OoAi0gOL2FZR45Y 4G2LCL/l1ZIVyRLfDcdladNssQtPhB0PR3mZs2VbO
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- James A. Donald: McViegh did not target innocents. Bin Laden did target innocents. Roy M. Silvernail I'm confused. Is Mr. Donald saying McVeigh did not surveil his target sufficiently to know that there was a day care center in the damage pattern? Bin Laden's intent was to make anyone in America afraid - thus the use of airliners, rather than truck bombs. McViegh's intent was to make BATF afraid. Analogously, in Iraq, the murder of schoolchildren for accepting candy from Americans, the use of children as human shields. If group A, acting as an organized cohesive entity with single central will, makes people belonging to group B rationally afraid by violent and evil acts, and someone in group B strikes back at group A in order to make group A afraid to do wrong, this is not terrorism, even if innocents happen to get in the way. If instead he goes after the guy who washes the windows for someone in group A, and the friend of the little sister in someone in group A, and the child who smiled at someone in group A, this is terrorism. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 9z/D+14dhYWqJz3LanaRzjhsYSdPrA+GrFSJrVNJ 4lnTkcOSZD+o/0b5hjEfABYlF305Ice+SWzVDUsTs
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- J.A. Terranson: So if I was to go out tomorrow and spread 2000 curies of Ci into the local subway system As payback for Ruby Ridge, this would not be an act of terrorism? James A. Donald: That would be terrorism, because regardless of what you *said* your intent was, you would not be targeting those responsible for Ruby Ridge. J.A. Terranson: And if the station I chose just happened to be the one servicing ATF? If your intent was to nail passing BATF employees, surely hitting closer to their office would be more effectual. Spray some radioactives in the entrance lobby. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG KWVunJBmZ52AZSOdaQb2Q5Zoz2Crn5g0U31NRSlo 4iLTYoVpo0AgmiEow46ObxjN4dPkqPP6I0kKDTG+9
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- On 23 Oct 2004 at 22:58, Adam wrote: I am curious, Mr. Donald, how exactly you define the word terrorist. I request that your definition be generic; i.e. not a definition like anyone who attacks the US.On 23 Oct 2004 at 22:58, Adam wrote: I am curious, Mr. Donald, how exactly you define the word terrorist. I request that your definition be generic; i.e. not a definition like anyone who attacks the US. Terrorist: One who uses terror as a means of coercion. The word was originally coined to describe the committee of public safety created by the french revolution, and was subsequently used to decribe similar regimes, most of them revolutionary, for example Lenin's. However it is equally applicable to non government groups who use similar measures. The difference between guerrilas and non government terrorists is that terrorists target random innocents - for example blowing up schoolchildren for accepting candy from US soldiers, as recently happened in Iraq. Similarly the deliberately capricious executions by most communist regimes, intended to produce a sense of fear and helplessness in their subjects. McViegh did not target innocents. Bin Laden did target innocents. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Kiq2Py/gfRNvDbIgFETkSh12S9ilsTHs1STZ0G+i 4YtWt9FfhBsS+aa3NSU17iXdsABNEuxtdCDwkYKjY
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
I am curious, Mr. Donald, how exactly you define the word terrorist. I request that your definition be generic; i.e. not a definition like anyone who attacks the US. I'd be willing to bet that you cannot provide a clear generic definition of terrorist. Moreover, I can guarantee that you cannot provide a definition that isn't self-contradictory. -Adam On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:59:15 -0700, James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: -- On 19 Oct 2004 at 10:23, Tyler Durden wrote: Most Cypherpunks would agree that free markets are a good thing. Basically, if you leave people alone, they'll figure out how to meet the needs that are out in there and, in the process, get a few of the goodies available to us as vapors on this world. I assume you would agree to this. There are however some bad people, who want to conquer and rule. Some of them are nastier than others. Those people need to be killed. Killing some of them is regrettably controversial. Killing terrorists should not be controversial. More than that, some of the countries we've been kicked out or prevented from influencing have been modernizing rapidly, the most obvious example is China and Vietnam. Your history is back to front. China and Vietnam stagnated, until they invited capitalists back in, and promised they could get rich. Mean while the countries that we were not kicked out of for example Taiwan and South Korea, became rich. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG y7IV2I3RzvTRwezbeYDac49MQJFtu4pLd09CpaV1 4wwT8kfGpRCZY7aO/mhgeoOcaR9vYeYFWae8aMM/M
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Roy M. Silvernail wrote: McViegh did not target innocents. Bin Laden did target innocents. I'm confused. So is Mr. Donald. Is Mr. Donald saying McVeigh did not surveil his target sufficiently to know that there was a day care center in the damage pattern? Or is he saying it only takes one non-innocent in a damage zone to justify an attack? (in which case, how is he privy to Bin Laden's attack plan, such that he can rule out any non-innocent targets) No, Mr. Donald is demonstrating irrational thought processes. You see, McVeigh isn't a terrorist because he had purity of purpose. But Bin Laden IS a terrorist because he had purity of purpose. -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0xBD4A95BF An ill wind is stalking while evil stars whir and all the gold apples go bad to the core S. Plath, Temper of Time
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 03:43 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: McViegh did not target innocents. Bin Laden did target innocents. I'm confused. Is Mr. Donald saying McVeigh did not surveil his target sufficiently to know that there was a day care center in the damage pattern? Or is he saying it only takes one non-innocent in a damage zone to justify an attack? (in which case, how is he privy to Bin Laden's attack plan, such that he can rule out any non-innocent targets) Or is the problem perhaps that any reasonable definition of terrorist must describe both McVeigh and Bin Laden? Ends do not justify means. A reasonable man would argue that attacking an occupied building with highly destructive weapons is an act intended to incite terror, without needing to even consider the motive. -- Roy M. Silvernail is [EMAIL PROTECTED], and you're not It's just this little chromium switch, here. - TFS SpamAssassin-procmail-/dev/null-bliss http://www.rant-central.com
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- On 22 Oct 2004 at 21:08, Tyler Durden wrote: Taiwan is a particularly odd example...it definitely has started forming a modern economy, but then again it had many decades of oppression. It also had swiped billions upon billions of dollars of gold and other substances that backed the Chinese monetary system prior to 1949, so arguably that money had to go somewhere. liar. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Ctgvg/767xVvEfZle9c/+vxKC3xtkjiX3R4NVIxk 4EMcaYvfC/Hefr1mG/wP4lnapr70KOuFu4ofYdQSC
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
From: Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Oct 19, 2004 10:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity) .. In developing markets the US track record is terrible. The more we interfere and set up puppet governments and petty dictators, the result has always been the near elimination of any kind of real modern economy. More than that, some of the countries we've been kicked out or prevented from influencing have been modernizing rapidly, the most obvious example is China and Vietnam. Bolivia is interesting to watch. So, Taiwan and South Korea seem like rather obvious counterexamples. -TD --John (Not a fan of interventionist foreign policy, FWIW)
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
Well, yes there are counterexamples I guess. The kind of retardation I'm talking about seems to happen when the influence in through covert, destabilising channels. Taiwan is a particularly odd example...it definitely has started forming a modern economy, but then again it had many decades of oppression. It also had swiped billions upon billions of dollars of gold and other substances that backed the Chinese monetary system prior to 1949, so arguably that money had to go somewhere. -TD From: John Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: John Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:59:26 -0400 (GMT-04:00) From: Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Oct 19, 2004 10:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity) ... In developing markets the US track record is terrible. The more we interfere and set up puppet governments and petty dictators, the result has always been the near elimination of any kind of real modern economy. More than that, some of the countries we've been kicked out or prevented from influencing have been modernizing rapidly, the most obvious example is China and Vietnam. Bolivia is interesting to watch. So, Taiwan and South Korea seem like rather obvious counterexamples. -TD --John (Not a fan of interventionist foreign policy, FWIW) _ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
Re: US Retardation of Free Markets (was Airport insanity)
-- On 19 Oct 2004 at 10:23, Tyler Durden wrote: Most Cypherpunks would agree that free markets are a good thing. Basically, if you leave people alone, they'll figure out how to meet the needs that are out in there and, in the process, get a few of the goodies available to us as vapors on this world. I assume you would agree to this. There are however some bad people, who want to conquer and rule. Some of them are nastier than others. Those people need to be killed. Killing some of them is regrettably controversial. Killing terrorists should not be controversial. More than that, some of the countries we've been kicked out or prevented from influencing have been modernizing rapidly, the most obvious example is China and Vietnam. Your history is back to front. China and Vietnam stagnated, until they invited capitalists back in, and promised they could get rich. Mean while the countries that we were not kicked out of for example Taiwan and South Korea, became rich. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG y7IV2I3RzvTRwezbeYDac49MQJFtu4pLd09CpaV1 4wwT8kfGpRCZY7aO/mhgeoOcaR9vYeYFWae8aMM/M
