🚀 go-pugleaf

And you post this annonymously.  That's typical.  How dare you.  The United
States will do whatever it takes to make sure that this never happens again.
Do you want to be afraid to leave your homes every day?  Do you want to be
afraid to take a commercial flight somewhere?  Why can't you people wake up
and realize that something HAS to be done.  Understand them?  You 've got to
be kidding.  They want to DESTROY us and everything we stand for.  That's
what you need to understand.  THEY DON'T CARE about us.  THEY DON'T CARE if
we're suffering.  THEY WANT TO DESTROY US!  WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE!

--
Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts
http://www.tudortarts.com/


"ann nonymous" <--@notprodigy.net> wrote in message
news:2racqt84pui2skke676v41gug0alg4ljm9@4ax.com...
>
> Noam Chomsky on Sept. 11
>
> Today's attacks were major atrocities. In scale they may not reach the
level of
> many others, for example, Clinton's bombing of the Sudan with no credible
> pretext, destroying half its pharmaceutical supplies and killing unknown
numbers
> of people (no one knows, because the US blocked an inquiry at the UN and
no one
> cares to pursue it). Not to speak of much worse cases, which easily come
to
> mind. But that this was a horrendous crime is not in doubt. The primary
victims,
> as usual, were working people: janitors, secretaries, firemen, etc. It is
likely
> to prove to be a crushing blow to Palestinians and other poor and
oppressed
> people. It is also likely to lead to harsh security controls, with many
possible
> ramifications for undermining civil liberties and internal freedom.
>
> The events reveal, dramatically, the foolishness of the project of
"missile
> defense." As has been obvious all along, and pointed out repeatedly by
strategic
> analysts, if anyone wants to cause immense damage in the US, including
weapons
> of mass destruction, they are highly unlikely to launch a missile attack,
thus
> guaranteeing their immediate destruction. There are innumerable easier
ways that
> are basically unstoppable. But today's events will, very likely, be
exploited to
> increase the pressure to develop these systems and put them into place.
> "Defense" is a thin cover for plans for militarization of space, and with
good
> PR, even the flimsiest arguments will carry some weight among a frightened
> public.
>
> In short, the crime is a gift to the hard jingoist right, those who hope
to use
> force to control their domains. That is even putting aside the likely US
> actions, and what they will trigger -- possibly more attacks like this
one, or
> worse. The prospects ahead are even more ominous than they appeared to be
before
> the latest atrocities.
>
> As to how to react, we have a choice. We can express justified horror; we
can
> seek to understand what may have led to the crimes, which means making an
effort
> to enter the minds of the likely perpetrators. If we choose the latter
course,
> we can do no better, I think, than to listen to the words of Robert Fisk,
whose
> direct knowledge and insight into affairs of the region is unmatched after
many
> years of distinguished reporting. Describing "The wickedness and awesome
cruelty
> of a crushed and humiliated people," he writes that "this is not the war
of
> democracy versus terror that the world will be asked to believe in the
coming
> days. It is also about American missiles smashing into Palestinian homes
and US
> helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and American
> shells crashing into a village called Qana and about a Lebanese militia �
paid
> and uniformed by America's Israeli ally � hacking and raping and murdering
their
> way through refugee camps." And much more. Again, we have a choice: we may
try
> to understand, or refuse to do so, contributing to the likelihood that
much
> worse lies ahead.
>
> Noam Chomsky
>
> ==========
>
> ---------------------
>
> "Man must change or die: there is no other course"
> Maitreya, the World Teacher
> http://www.shareintl.org
>

"Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
message news:9o5b2u$15p7$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> And you post this annonymously.  That's typical.  How dare you.  The
United
> States will do whatever it takes to make sure that this never happens
again.
> Do you want to be afraid to leave your homes every day?  Do you want to be
> afraid to take a commercial flight somewhere?  Why can't you people wake
up
> and realize that something HAS to be done.  Understand them?  You 've got
to
> be kidding.  They want to DESTROY us and everything we stand for.  That's
> what you need to understand.  THEY DON'T CARE about us.  THEY DON'T CARE
if
> we're suffering.  THEY WANT TO DESTROY US!  WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE!

Never heard of Chomski? Hint: He has more raw brain power than you, your
family and your last audience combined. I understand you are currently
unstable due to the extremes of emotions such carnage causes, but why lash
out at those expressing perfectly valid, well thought out, well supported
ideas?

Is that your idea of the way a good American should respond to dissent? If
so, I sure as hell don't want to live in your America. I prefer to live
somewhere where people are free to think what they will.

Cheers,

Dusty







ews:2racqt84pui2skke676v41gug0alg4ljm9@4ax.com...
> >
> > Noam Chomsky on Sept. 11
> >
> > Today's attacks were major atrocities. In scale they may not reach the
> level of
> > many others, for example, Clinton's bombing of the Sudan with no
credible
> > pretext, destroying half its pharmaceutical supplies and killing unknown
> numbers
> > of people (no one knows, because the US blocked an inquiry at the UN and
> no one
> > cares to pursue it). Not to speak of much worse cases, which easily come
> to
> > mind. But that this was a horrendous crime is not in doubt. The primary
> victims,
> > as usual, were working people: janitors, secretaries, firemen, etc. It
is
> likely
> > to prove to be a crushing blow to Palestinians and other poor and
> oppressed
> > people. It is also likely to lead to harsh security controls, with many
> possible
> > ramifications for undermining civil liberties and internal freedom.
> >
> > The events reveal, dramatically, the foolishness of the project of
> "missile
> > defense." As has been obvious all along, and pointed out repeatedly by
> strategic
> > analysts, if anyone wants to cause immense damage in the US, including
> weapons
> > of mass destruction, they are highly unlikely to launch a missile
attack,
> thus
> > guaranteeing their immediate destruction. There are innumerable easier
> ways that
> > are basically unstoppable. But today's events will, very likely, be
> exploited to
> > increase the pressure to develop these systems and put them into place.
> > "Defense" is a thin cover for plans for militarization of space, and
with
> good
> > PR, even the flimsiest arguments will carry some weight among a
frightened
> > public.
> >
> > In short, the crime is a gift to the hard jingoist right, those who hope
> to use
> > force to control their domains. That is even putting aside the likely US
> > actions, and what they will trigger -- possibly more attacks like this
> one, or
> > worse. The prospects ahead are even more ominous than they appeared to
be
> before
> > the latest atrocities.
> >
> > As to how to react, we have a choice. We can express justified horror;
we
> can
> > seek to understand what may have led to the crimes, which means making
an
> effort
> > to enter the minds of the likely perpetrators. If we choose the latter
> course,
> > we can do no better, I think, than to listen to the words of Robert
Fisk,
> whose
> > direct knowledge and insight into affairs of the region is unmatched
after
> many
> > years of distinguished reporting. Describing "The wickedness and awesome
> cruelty
> > of a crushed and humiliated people," he writes that "this is not the war
> of
> > democracy versus terror that the world will be asked to believe in the
> coming
> > days. It is also about American missiles smashing into Palestinian homes
> and US
> > helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and
American
> > shells crashing into a village called Qana and about a Lebanese
militia �
> paid
> > and uniformed by America's Israeli ally � hacking and raping and
murdering
> their
> > way through refugee camps." And much more. Again, we have a choice: we
may
> try
> > to understand, or refuse to do so, contributing to the likelihood that
> much
> > worse lies ahead.
> >
> > Noam Chomsky
> >
> > ==========
> >
> > ---------------------
> >
> > "Man must change or die: there is no other course"
> > Maitreya, the World Teacher
> > http://www.shareintl.org
> >
>
>

Hi folks, could you take out alt.good.news if you reply to this?   Thanks.
(I already did in this post).

--
*Cheers*
~Just Me~

"My life has no purpose, no direction, no aim, and yet I am happy.
I can't figure it out.  What am I doing right?"
~Charles M. Schulz


"Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
message news:9o5b2u$15p7$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> And you post this annonymously.  That's typical.  How dare you.  The
United
> States will do whatever it takes to make sure that this never happens
again.
> Do you want to be afraid to leave your homes every day?  Do you want to be
> afraid to take a commercial flight somewhere?  Why can't you people wake
up
> and realize that something HAS to be done.  Understand them?  You 've got
to
> be kidding.  They want to DESTROY us and everything we stand for.  That's
> what you need to understand.  THEY DON'T CARE about us.  THEY DON'T CARE
if
> we're suffering.  THEY WANT TO DESTROY US!  WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE!
>
> --
> Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts
> http://www.tudortarts.com/
>
>
> "ann nonymous" <--@notprodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:2racqt84pui2skke676v41gug0alg4ljm9@4ax.com...
> >
> > Noam Chomsky on Sept. 11
> >
> > Today's attacks were major atrocities. In scale they may not reach the
> level of
> > many others, for example, Clinton's bombing of the Sudan with no
credible
> > pretext, destroying half its pharmaceutical supplies and killing unknown
> numbers
> > of people (no one knows, because the US blocked an inquiry at the UN and
> no one
> > cares to pursue it). Not to speak of much worse cases, which easily come
> to
> > mind. But that this was a horrendous crime is not in doubt. The primary
> victims,
> > as usual, were working people: janitors, secretaries, firemen, etc. It
is
> likely
> > to prove to be a crushing blow to Palestinians and other poor and
> oppressed
> > people. It is also likely to lead to harsh security controls, with many
> possible
> > ramifications for undermining civil liberties and internal freedom.
> >
> > The events reveal, dramatically, the foolishness of the project of
> "missile
> > defense." As has been obvious all along, and pointed out repeatedly by
> strategic
> > analysts, if anyone wants to cause immense damage in the US, including
> weapons
> > of mass destruction, they are highly unlikely to launch a missile
attack,
> thus
> > guaranteeing their immediate destruction. There are innumerable easier
> ways that
> > are basically unstoppable. But today's events will, very likely, be
> exploited to
> > increase the pressure to develop these systems and put them into place.
> > "Defense" is a thin cover for plans for militarization of space, and
with
> good
> > PR, even the flimsiest arguments will carry some weight among a
frightened
> > public.
> >
> > In short, the crime is a gift to the hard jingoist right, those who hope
> to use
> > force to control their domains. That is even putting aside the likely US
> > actions, and what they will trigger -- possibly more attacks like this
> one, or
> > worse. The prospects ahead are even more ominous than they appeared to
be
> before
> > the latest atrocities.
> >
> > As to how to react, we have a choice. We can express justified horror;
we
> can
> > seek to understand what may have led to the crimes, which means making
an
> effort
> > to enter the minds of the likely perpetrators. If we choose the latter
> course,
> > we can do no better, I think, than to listen to the words of Robert
Fisk,
> whose
> > direct knowledge and insight into affairs of the region is unmatched
after
> many
> > years of distinguished reporting. Describing "The wickedness and awesome
> cruelty
> > of a crushed and humiliated people," he writes that "this is not the war
> of
> > democracy versus terror that the world will be asked to believe in the
> coming
> > days. It is also about American missiles smashing into Palestinian homes
> and US
> > helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and
American
> > shells crashing into a village called Qana and about a Lebanese
militia �
> paid
> > and uniformed by America's Israeli ally � hacking and raping and
murdering
> their
> > way through refugee camps." And much more. Again, we have a choice: we
may
> try
> > to understand, or refuse to do so, contributing to the likelihood that
> much
> > worse lies ahead.
> >
> > Noam Chomsky
> >
> > ==========
> >
> > ---------------------
> >
> > "Man must change or die: there is no other course"
> > Maitreya, the World Teacher
> > http://www.shareintl.org
> >
>
>

Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> Never heard of Chomski? 

No.

Karen

"Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
news:3BA63F89.1AB06268@wordwrite.com...
> Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > Never heard of Chomski?
>
> No.

He is generally considered the premier mind of modern linguistic studies -
head of the department at MIT - and is also a well known political and
social essayist and commentator. Here's a link to some links.

http://www.synaptic.bc.ca/ejournal/chomsky.htm

Cheers,

Dusty

Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> 
> "Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
> news:3BA63F89.1AB06268@wordwrite.com...
> > Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > > Never heard of Chomski?
> >
> > No.
> 
> He is generally considered the premier mind of modern linguistic studies -
> head of the department at MIT -

Silly me, I thought that was Chomsky.

Karen

Ok...so he's a pacifist who has a grasp of the English language.  We're
supposed to bend over and take him any way he chooses?  Why is it that
people who quote him have to post annonymously?  *grin*

--
Elizabeth


"Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
news:ygrp7.602166$lq1.129521727@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> "Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
> news:3BA63F89.1AB06268@wordwrite.com...
> > Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > > Never heard of Chomski?
> >
> > No.
>
> He is generally considered the premier mind of modern linguistic studies -
> head of the department at MIT - and is also a well known political and
> social essayist and commentator. Here's a link to some links.
>
> http://www.synaptic.bc.ca/ejournal/chomsky.htm
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dusty
>
>

"Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
message news:9o5gbq$189b$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> Ok...so he's a pacifist who has a grasp of the English language.  We're
> supposed to bend over and take him any way he chooses?  Why is it that
> people who quote him have to post annonymously?  *grin*

Take him any way you want, but getting your panties in a wad and decrying
his very right to speak is just plain silly. BTW, the fact that it was
posted anonymously has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the content.
That, my dear, is a red herring. A rather smelly one, at that.

Cheers,

Dusty

>
> --
> Elizabeth
>
>
> "Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
> news:ygrp7.602166$lq1.129521727@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > "Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
> > news:3BA63F89.1AB06268@wordwrite.com...
> > > Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > > > Never heard of Chomski?
> > >
> > > No.
> >
> > He is generally considered the premier mind of modern linguistic
studies -
> > head of the department at MIT - and is also a well known political and
> > social essayist and commentator. Here's a link to some links.
> >
> > http://www.synaptic.bc.ca/ejournal/chomsky.htm
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dusty
> >
> >
>
>

"Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
news:3BA6454D.9E5D1915@wordwrite.com...
> Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> >
> > "Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
> > news:3BA63F89.1AB06268@wordwrite.com...
> > > Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > > > Never heard of Chomski?
> > >
> > > No.
> >
> > He is generally considered the premier mind of modern linguistic
studies -
> > head of the department at MIT -
>
> Silly me, I thought that was Chomsky.

Mea cupla.

Cheers,

Dusty

Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> 
> "Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
> news:3BA6454D.9E5D1915@wordwrite.com...
> > Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > >
> > > "Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3BA63F89.1AB06268@wordwrite.com...
> > > > Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > > > > Never heard of Chomski?
> > > >
> > > > No.
> > >
> > > He is generally considered the premier mind of modern linguistic
> studies -
> > > head of the department at MIT -
> >
> > Silly me, I thought that was Chomsky.
> 
> Mea cupla.

LOL! Who says you can't poke fun at yourself?!

Karen

Whatever....

--
Elizabeth


"Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
news:%Crp7.602480$lq1.129541404@typhoon.austin.rr.com...

> Take him any way you want, but getting your panties in a wad and decrying
> his very right to speak is just plain silly. BTW, the fact that it was
> posted anonymously has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the
content.
> That, my dear, is a red herring. A rather smelly one, at that.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dusty
>

"Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
news:3BA64A7F.4513AE7D@wordwrite.com...
> Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> >
> > "Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
> > news:3BA6454D.9E5D1915@wordwrite.com...
> > > Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:3BA63F89.1AB06268@wordwrite.com...
> > > > > Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > > > > > Never heard of Chomski?
> > > > >
> > > > > No.
> > > >
> > > > He is generally considered the premier mind of modern linguistic
> > studies -
> > > > head of the department at MIT -
> > >
> > > Silly me, I thought that was Chomsky.
> >
> > Mea cupla.
>
> LOL! Who says you can't poke fun at yourself?!

Thought you'd like that.

Cheers,

Dusty

"Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
message news:9o5i1t$18rf$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> Whatever....

Ah, quoting that icon of logical thought Jenna Bush, eh? I know Jenna Bush
and you're no Jenna Bush.

Cheers,

Dusty

>
> --
> Elizabeth
>
>
> "Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
> news:%Crp7.602480$lq1.129541404@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
>
> > Take him any way you want, but getting your panties in a wad and
decrying
> > his very right to speak is just plain silly. BTW, the fact that it was
> > posted anonymously has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the
> content.
> > That, my dear, is a red herring. A rather smelly one, at that.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dusty
> >
>
>
>

*grin*...not quite sure whether that was intended as an insult or a
compliment....
--
Elizabeth


"Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
news:jlsp7.603142$lq1.129578639@typhoon.austin.rr.com...

> Ah, quoting that icon of logical thought Jenna Bush, eh? I know Jenna Bush
> and you're no Jenna Bush.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dusty
>

In article <9o5b2u$15p7$1@galaxy.us.dell.com>,
Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote:
>And you post this annonymously.  That's typical.  How dare you.  The United
>States will do whatever it takes to make sure that this never happens again.
>Do you want to be afraid to leave your homes every day?  Do you want to be
>afraid to take a commercial flight somewhere?  Why can't you people wake up
>and realize that something HAS to be done.  Understand them?  You 've got to
>be kidding.  They want to DESTROY us and everything we stand for.  That's
>what you need to understand.  THEY DON'T CARE about us.  THEY DON'T CARE if
>we're suffering.  THEY WANT TO DESTROY US!  WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE!


Again, who is "they", where are "they" and what do you suppose we
can do about it without killing even more innocent civilians than
"they" did?

(I'm not saying we shouldn't respond, but these questions need to be
answered before we take out our anger on some easy and inaccurate
target.)


-- Lyn

-- 
==============================================================================
Lyn Pierce                      Empathy is the key to persuasion.  Know your
tumlin@cs.utexas.edu            adversary's mind before you try to change it.
www.cs.utexas.edu/users/tumlin

"They" need to be identified and dealt with as any other murderer would be.
This is one of the reasons that Bush didn't take an immediate retaliatory
action.  War is war.  Whether we like it or not, innocents will die.  Do you
think the bomber pilots wanted to kill innocent people on their bomb runs
during WWII?  Do you think we wanted to kill innocent people when we dropped
the bomb?  Do you think the American soldiers liked killing the children who
were sent with booby traps on their bodies by the Viet Cong?
--
Elizabeth



"Lyn Pierce" <tumlin@cs.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:9o5ld4$li4$1@cosmos.cs.utexas.edu...
> In article <9o5b2u$15p7$1@galaxy.us.dell.com>,
>
> Again, who is "they", where are "they" and what do you suppose we
> can do about it without killing even more innocent civilians than
> "they" did?
>
> (I'm not saying we shouldn't respond, but these questions need to be
> answered before we take out our anger on some easy and inaccurate
> target.)
>
>
> -- Lyn
>
> --
>
============================================================================
==
> Lyn Pierce                      Empathy is the key to persuasion.  Know
your
> tumlin@cs.utexas.edu            adversary's mind before you try to change
it.
> www.cs.utexas.edu/users/tumlin

"Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
message news:9o5l2e$1ah1$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> *grin*...not quite sure whether that was intended as an insult or a
> compliment....

She's pretty cute, but yer cute, too, in a buxom lass kinda way. And you're
*intentionally* entertaining.

Cheers,

Dusty

> --
> Elizabeth
>
>
> "Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
> news:jlsp7.603142$lq1.129578639@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
>
> > Ah, quoting that icon of logical thought Jenna Bush, eh? I know Jenna
Bush
> > and you're no Jenna Bush.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dusty
> >
>
>
>

"tiro" <Greg@Leibman.com> wrote in message
news:sancqtcqvpoim0ogmkhuglcefimc5egqlm@4ax.com...

> Hes been bashed by many since
> the 80s as trying to speak outside his field of expertise -
> linguistics which they say hes pretty much abandoned , churning out
> these diatribes like Manufacturing Consent.  A high brow for low brows
> dabbling in leftist politics.

Abandoned? No doubt MIT will be very interested in your inside info, as they
still list him not only as head of their Linguistics Department, which, as
I'm sure you know, also encompasses their Philosophy Department, but also,
"Institute Professor; Professor of Linguistics, Linguistic Theory, Syntax,
Semantics, Philosophy of Language."

http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/www/chomsky.home.html

Cheers,

Dusty

Please remove alt.good.news thank you!

--

TC3
"Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
news:Hmtp7.603760$lq1.129630804@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> "Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
> message news:9o5l2e$1ah1$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> > *grin*...not quite sure whether that was intended as an insult or a
> > compliment....
>
> She's pretty cute, but yer cute, too, in a buxom lass kinda way. And
you're
> *intentionally* entertaining.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dusty
>
> > --
> > Elizabeth
> >
> >
> > "Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
> > news:jlsp7.603142$lq1.129578639@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> >
> > > Ah, quoting that icon of logical thought Jenna Bush, eh? I know Jenna
> Bush
> > > and you're no Jenna Bush.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Dusty
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

"Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
news:W%qp7.601967$lq1.129506902@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> "Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
> message news:9o5b2u$15p7$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> > And you post this annonymously.  That's typical.  How dare you.  The
> United
> > States will do whatever it takes to make sure that this never happens
> again.
> > Do you want to be afraid to leave your homes every day?  Do you want to
be
> > afraid to take a commercial flight somewhere?  Why can't you people wake
> up
> > and realize that something HAS to be done.  Understand them?  You 've
got
> to
> > be kidding.  They want to DESTROY us and everything we stand for.
That's
> > what you need to understand.  THEY DON'T CARE about us.  THEY DON'T CARE
> if
> > we're suffering.  THEY WANT TO DESTROY US!  WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE!
>
> Never heard of Chomski? Hint: He has more raw brain power than you, your
> family and your last audience combined.

I beg to differ with you, John.

I met Noam, and in fact debated him on politics and economics.

In his field, he is an acknowledged genius.

Outside of his field, and his, well, field of view is mighty narrow.

Noam is a small-c communist (in the tradition of Israeli kibbutzim, in
fact), a direct descendent intellectually of Rosa Luxembourg.  Noam derides
liberty and the Bill of Rights as passe.  His
anarcho-socialism-environmentalism is quaint in its simplistic worldview,
dangerous and life-threatening if implemented.

His use of linguistics is exquisite, but then again, Goebbels did well, too.

> I understand you are currently
> unstable due to the extremes of emotions such carnage causes, but why lash
> out at those expressing perfectly valid, well thought out, well supported
> ideas?


In this I have to sadly agree - Chomsky's opinions, IN THIS CASE, make some
amount of sense.  But note that Chomsky is what we call a Jew-hating Jew.
He hates Israel, detests Judaism, and decries all those who come from his
faith.  He is that odd duck, the anti-semetic Jew.

Now that you know that (and I urge you to do your own research on this,
don't take my word for it), his comments assume their proper place.

> Is that your idea of the way a good American should respond to dissent? If
> so, I sure as hell don't want to live in your America. I prefer to live
> somewhere where people are free to think what they will.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dusty
>

I agree with you on this, John.  When we become like our enemies, we ARE the
enemy.

Alan



>
>
>
>
> ews:2racqt84pui2skke676v41gug0alg4ljm9@4ax.com...
> > >
> > > Noam Chomsky on Sept. 11
> > >
> > > Today's attacks were major atrocities. In scale they may not reach the
> > level of
> > > many others, for example, Clinton's bombing of the Sudan with no
> credible
> > > pretext, destroying half its pharmaceutical supplies and killing
unknown
> > numbers
> > > of people (no one knows, because the US blocked an inquiry at the UN
and
> > no one
> > > cares to pursue it). Not to speak of much worse cases, which easily
come
> > to
> > > mind. But that this was a horrendous crime is not in doubt. The
primary
> > victims,
> > > as usual, were working people: janitors, secretaries, firemen, etc. It
> is
> > likely
> > > to prove to be a crushing blow to Palestinians and other poor and
> > oppressed
> > > people. It is also likely to lead to harsh security controls, with
many
> > possible
> > > ramifications for undermining civil liberties and internal freedom.
> > >
> > > The events reveal, dramatically, the foolishness of the project of
> > "missile
> > > defense." As has been obvious all along, and pointed out repeatedly by
> > strategic
> > > analysts, if anyone wants to cause immense damage in the US, including
> > weapons
> > > of mass destruction, they are highly unlikely to launch a missile
> attack,
> > thus
> > > guaranteeing their immediate destruction. There are innumerable easier
> > ways that
> > > are basically unstoppable. But today's events will, very likely, be
> > exploited to
> > > increase the pressure to develop these systems and put them into
place.
> > > "Defense" is a thin cover for plans for militarization of space, and
> with
> > good
> > > PR, even the flimsiest arguments will carry some weight among a
> frightened
> > > public.
> > >
> > > In short, the crime is a gift to the hard jingoist right, those who
hope
> > to use
> > > force to control their domains. That is even putting aside the likely
US
> > > actions, and what they will trigger -- possibly more attacks like this
> > one, or
> > > worse. The prospects ahead are even more ominous than they appeared to
> be
> > before
> > > the latest atrocities.
> > >
> > > As to how to react, we have a choice. We can express justified horror;
> we
> > can
> > > seek to understand what may have led to the crimes, which means making
> an
> > effort
> > > to enter the minds of the likely perpetrators. If we choose the latter
> > course,
> > > we can do no better, I think, than to listen to the words of Robert
> Fisk,
> > whose
> > > direct knowledge and insight into affairs of the region is unmatched
> after
> > many
> > > years of distinguished reporting. Describing "The wickedness and
awesome
> > cruelty
> > > of a crushed and humiliated people," he writes that "this is not the
war
> > of
> > > democracy versus terror that the world will be asked to believe in the
> > coming
> > > days. It is also about American missiles smashing into Palestinian
homes
> > and US
> > > helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and
> American
> > > shells crashing into a village called Qana and about a Lebanese
> militia �
> > paid
> > > and uniformed by America's Israeli ally � hacking and raping and
> murdering
> > their
> > > way through refugee camps." And much more. Again, we have a choice: we
> may
> > try
> > > to understand, or refuse to do so, contributing to the likelihood that
> > much
> > > worse lies ahead.
> > >
> > > Noam Chomsky
> > >
> > > ==========
> > >
> > > ---------------------
> > >
> > > "Man must change or die: there is no other course"
> > > Maitreya, the World Teacher
> > > http://www.shareintl.org
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

"Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
news:%Crp7.602480$lq1.129541404@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> "Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
> message news:9o5gbq$189b$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> > Ok...so he's a pacifist who has a grasp of the English language.  We're
> > supposed to bend over and take him any way he chooses?  Why is it that
> > people who quote him have to post annonymously?  *grin*
>
> Take him any way you want, but getting your panties in a wad and decrying
> his very right to speak is just plain silly.

Very sexist statement for you to make, John, and also very male chauvinist,
too.

Beneath you.

Alan


BTW, the fact that it was
> posted anonymously has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the
content.
> That, my dear, is a red herring. A rather smelly one, at that.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dusty
>
> >
> > --
> > Elizabeth
> >
> >
> > "Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
> > news:ygrp7.602166$lq1.129521727@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > > "Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3BA63F89.1AB06268@wordwrite.com...
> > > > Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > > > > Never heard of Chomski?
> > > >
> > > > No.
> > >
> > > He is generally considered the premier mind of modern linguistic
> studies -
> > > head of the department at MIT - and is also a well known political and
> > > social essayist and commentator. Here's a link to some links.
> > >
> > > http://www.synaptic.bc.ca/ejournal/chomsky.htm
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Dusty
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Oh look an "I agree post"!  Me too, me toooo!!  Bah!!!!!

--
*Cheers*
~Just Me~

"My life has no purpose, no direction, no aim, and yet I am happy.
I can't figure it out.  What am I doing right?"
~Charles M. Schulz


"Alan R." <alan@ebenchmarks.com> wrote in message
news:N%vp7.276955$g_3.61698169@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
>
> "Dusty Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote in message
> news:W%qp7.601967$lq1.129506902@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > "Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
> > message news:9o5b2u$15p7$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> > > And you post this annonymously.  That's typical.  How dare you.  The
> > United
> > > States will do whatever it takes to make sure that this never happens
> > again.
> > > Do you want to be afraid to leave your homes every day?  Do you want
to
> be
> > > afraid to take a commercial flight somewhere?  Why can't you people
wake
> > up
> > > and realize that something HAS to be done.  Understand them?  You 've
> got
> > to
> > > be kidding.  They want to DESTROY us and everything we stand for.
> That's
> > > what you need to understand.  THEY DON'T CARE about us.  THEY DON'T
CARE
> > if
> > > we're suffering.  THEY WANT TO DESTROY US!  WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE!
> >
> > Never heard of Chomski? Hint: He has more raw brain power than you, your
> > family and your last audience combined.
>
> I beg to differ with you, John.
>
> I met Noam, and in fact debated him on politics and economics.
>
> In his field, he is an acknowledged genius.
>
> Outside of his field, and his, well, field of view is mighty narrow.
>
> Noam is a small-c communist (in the tradition of Israeli kibbutzim, in
> fact), a direct descendent intellectually of Rosa Luxembourg.  Noam
derides
> liberty and the Bill of Rights as passe.  His
> anarcho-socialism-environmentalism is quaint in its simplistic worldview,
> dangerous and life-threatening if implemented.
>
> His use of linguistics is exquisite, but then again, Goebbels did well,
too.
>
> > I understand you are currently
> > unstable due to the extremes of emotions such carnage causes, but why
lash
> > out at those expressing perfectly valid, well thought out, well
supported
> > ideas?
>
>
> In this I have to sadly agree - Chomsky's opinions, IN THIS CASE, make
some
> amount of sense.  But note that Chomsky is what we call a Jew-hating Jew.
> He hates Israel, detests Judaism, and decries all those who come from his
> faith.  He is that odd duck, the anti-semetic Jew.
>
> Now that you know that (and I urge you to do your own research on this,
> don't take my word for it), his comments assume their proper place.
>
> > Is that your idea of the way a good American should respond to dissent?
If
> > so, I sure as hell don't want to live in your America. I prefer to live
> > somewhere where people are free to think what they will.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Dusty
> >
>
> I agree with you on this, John.  When we become like our enemies, we ARE
the
> enemy.
>
> Alan
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ews:2racqt84pui2skke676v41gug0alg4ljm9@4ax.com...
> > > >
> > > > Noam Chomsky on Sept. 11
> > > >
> > > > Today's attacks were major atrocities. In scale they may not reach
the
> > > level of
> > > > many others, for example, Clinton's bombing of the Sudan with no
> > credible
> > > > pretext, destroying half its pharmaceutical supplies and killing
> unknown
> > > numbers
> > > > of people (no one knows, because the US blocked an inquiry at the UN
> and
> > > no one
> > > > cares to pursue it). Not to speak of much worse cases, which easily
> come
> > > to
> > > > mind. But that this was a horrendous crime is not in doubt. The
> primary
> > > victims,
> > > > as usual, were working people: janitors, secretaries, firemen, etc.
It
> > is
> > > likely
> > > > to prove to be a crushing blow to Palestinians and other poor and
> > > oppressed
> > > > people. It is also likely to lead to harsh security controls, with
> many
> > > possible
> > > > ramifications for undermining civil liberties and internal freedom.
> > > >
> > > > The events reveal, dramatically, the foolishness of the project of
> > > "missile
> > > > defense." As has been obvious all along, and pointed out repeatedly
by
> > > strategic
> > > > analysts, if anyone wants to cause immense damage in the US,
including
> > > weapons
> > > > of mass destruction, they are highly unlikely to launch a missile
> > attack,
> > > thus
> > > > guaranteeing their immediate destruction. There are innumerable
easier
> > > ways that
> > > > are basically unstoppable. But today's events will, very likely, be
> > > exploited to
> > > > increase the pressure to develop these systems and put them into
> place.
> > > > "Defense" is a thin cover for plans for militarization of space, and
> > with
> > > good
> > > > PR, even the flimsiest arguments will carry some weight among a
> > frightened
> > > > public.
> > > >
> > > > In short, the crime is a gift to the hard jingoist right, those who
> hope
> > > to use
> > > > force to control their domains. That is even putting aside the
likely
> US
> > > > actions, and what they will trigger -- possibly more attacks like
this
> > > one, or
> > > > worse. The prospects ahead are even more ominous than they appeared
to
> > be
> > > before
> > > > the latest atrocities.
> > > >
> > > > As to how to react, we have a choice. We can express justified
horror;
> > we
> > > can
> > > > seek to understand what may have led to the crimes, which means
making
> > an
> > > effort
> > > > to enter the minds of the likely perpetrators. If we choose the
latter
> > > course,
> > > > we can do no better, I think, than to listen to the words of Robert
> > Fisk,
> > > whose
> > > > direct knowledge and insight into affairs of the region is unmatched
> > after
> > > many
> > > > years of distinguished reporting. Describing "The wickedness and
> awesome
> > > cruelty
> > > > of a crushed and humiliated people," he writes that "this is not the
> war
> > > of
> > > > democracy versus terror that the world will be asked to believe in
the
> > > coming
> > > > days. It is also about American missiles smashing into Palestinian
> homes
> > > and US
> > > > helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and
> > American
> > > > shells crashing into a village called Qana and about a Lebanese
> > militia �
> > > paid
> > > > and uniformed by America's Israeli ally � hacking and raping and
> > murdering
> > > their
> > > > way through refugee camps." And much more. Again, we have a choice:
we
> > may
> > > try
> > > > to understand, or refuse to do so, contributing to the likelihood
that
> > > much
> > > > worse lies ahead.
> > > >
> > > > Noam Chomsky
> > > >
> > > > ==========
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------
> > > >
> > > > "Man must change or die: there is no other course"
> > > > Maitreya, the World Teacher
> > > > http://www.shareintl.org
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

In article <Hmtp7.603760$lq1.129630804@typhoon.austin.rr.com>, "Dusty
Rhodes" <terra@CUTITOUTtexas.net> wrote:

> "Elizabeth of the Tudor Tarts" <elizabetNOSPAM@inetport.com> wrote in
> message news:9o5l2e$1ah1$1@galaxy.us.dell.com...
> > *grin*...not quite sure whether that was intended as an insult or a
> > compliment....
> 
> She's pretty cute, but yer cute, too, in a buxom lass kinda way. And you're
> *intentionally* entertaining.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dusty

Hey Dusty, you never said if *I* was cute or not!
I *finally* fixed my picture link:

until soon, Hope

Hope Munro Smith, IC chips 'n' salsa
http://wwwvms.utexas.edu/~hopems

First, apology to the intellectually "superior"; I'll apologize to the
overly passionate
in a later post...

Isn't Noam Chomski a bit of overly rated and hyped, for the past 40 or so
years? What significant value has Mr. Chomski added to the economy? You
know, a person can't just ride on old reputations, what have you contributed
lately?

The quai-military NASA sent human to the moon, the socially deprived
nerds gave us the Internet, the greedy gave us the dot com and 2.0 GHz CPU,
the insecure gave us Rolex and Porsche, the marketers gave us 20 brands of
tooth paste, and Mr. Chomski and his groupies? keep on hyping that they are
intellectually superior than us with some convoluted fru fru?! It's great to
feel high
and mighty, doesn't it?

"Karen Kay" <karen@wordwrite.com> wrote in message
news:3BA63F89.1AB06268@wordwrite.com...
> Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> > Never heard of Chomski?
>
> No.
>
> Karen

Below is an excerpt from a recent talk by John Robbins - he chose to
walk away from Baskin-Robbins  "... to pursue the dream of a society
at peace with its conscience because it respects and lives in harmony
with all life forms...."

Please share this information with others. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
TERROR, LOVE, AND THE STATE OF THE WORLD
 by John Robbins, founder of EarthSave International, 
http://www.foodrevolution.org

  *   *   *   *   *   *   *   
 
        Approximately 6,000 people perished in the September 11th 
attacks . . .  But those who died from the attacks on that tragic day 
were not alone. On September 11th, 35,000 children worldwide died of 
hunger. A similar number of children died on September 12th, and 
again on the 13th, and on  every single day since then.  Meanwhile, 
we in the U.S. feed 80% of our  grain harvest to livestock so that a 
people whose cholesterol levels are too high can have cheap meat.
 
      To advance human security and control terrorism, we must not 
only find the brutality of the September 11th attacks to be totally 
intolerable. We must also find intolerable that one billion people 
worldwide struggle to survive on $1 a day, that more than one billion 
people lack access to safe drinking water, and that 3 billion people 
have inadequate access to sanitation. If we are serious about 
stopping terrorism, then our  goal must be to reduce the level of 
pollution, fear, and poverty in the  world.
 
     The cost of our initial military  response will easily top $100 
billion (on top of our already enormous annual  defense budget of 
$342 billion).  What could we accomplish if we spent  even a small 
fraction of that much on programs to alleviate human  suffering?
 
      In 1998, the United Nations Development Program estimated that 
it would cost an additional $9 billion (above current expenditures) 
to provide clean water and sanitation for everyone on earth.  It 
would cost  an additional $12 billion, they said, to cover 
reproductive health  services for all women worldwide. Another $13 
billion would be enough not only to give every person on Earth enough 
food to eat but also basic  health care. An additional $6 billion 
could provide basic education for all.
 
     These are large numbers, but combined they add up to $40 billion 
- - only one fifth as much as the $200 billion the U.S. government 
agreed in October 2001 to pay Lockheed to build new F-35 Joint Strike 
Fighter (JSF) jets.
 
What if we were equally as dedicated to eradicate hunger, to provide 
clean water, to defeat infectious disease, to provide adequate jobs, 
to combat illiteracy, and to end homelessness?
 
    What if we understood that, today, there is no such thing as 
national security as long as the basic human needs of large portions 
of humanity are not met?"

http://www.foodrevolution.org

------------------------

"Man must change or die. There is no other course."
Maitreya, the World Teacher
http://www.shareintl.org


.


...


.......

Volunteer wrote:

> Below is an excerpt from a recent talk by John Robbins - he chose to
> walk away from Baskin-Robbins  "... to pursue the dream of a society
> at peace with its conscience because it respects and lives in harmony
> with all life forms...."
>
> Please share this information with others.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> TERROR, LOVE, AND THE STATE OF THE WORLD
>  by John Robbins, founder of EarthSave International,
> http://www.foodrevolution.org
>
>   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
>
>         Approximately 6,000 people perished in the September 11th
> attacks . . .  But those who died from the attacks on that tragic day
> were not alone. On September 11th, 35,000 children worldwide died of
> hunger. A similar number of children died on September 12th, and
> again on the 13th, and on  every single day since then.  Meanwhile,
> we in the U.S. feed 80% of our  grain harvest to livestock so that a
> people whose cholesterol levels are too high can have cheap meat.

Because, that's what we eat.

The starving children cited are starving primarily because their
governments put them in that position.

So, by diverting our grains from beef to starving children, we in effect
subsidize bad government. Why is the failure to properly govern and manage
resources for the good of the people, as we do here in the US, constantly
laid at our door?

Perhaps a more realistic and long-lasting strategy is for these people to
revolt against bad government, rather than have the US continually enable
them via our tax dollars.

Is the aim to raise the rest of the world to our level, or bring us down
to theirs?


>
>
>       To advance human security and control terrorism, we must not
> only find the brutality of the September 11th attacks to be totally
> intolerable. We must also find intolerable that one billion people
> worldwide struggle to survive on $1 a day, that more than one billion
> people lack access to safe drinking water, and that 3 billion people
> have inadequate access to sanitation.

We do find it intolerable. That's one reason our taxes are so high - to
make up for bad governmental policies that produce starvation. Why is it
the sole responsibility of the US to make up for mismanagement on the part
of the third world? We do so on a steady basis, just how much are we
expected to sacrifice at home to prop up peoples who's government manages
resources poorly? Why are we supposed to save the rainforest when *we
aren't the people burning it down*


> If we are serious about
> stopping terrorism, then our  goal must be to reduce the level of
> pollution, fear, and poverty in the  world.

Which we do. You'd get the idea from this guilt-ridden piece that we turn
our backs on all these problems overseas, when facts show otherwise. You
can lead a dumbassed leader to water, but you can't make him stop stealing
it from his constituency.

>
>
>      The cost of our initial military  response will easily top $100
> billion (on top of our already enormous annual  defense budget of
> $342 billion).  What could we accomplish if we spent  even a small
> fraction of that much on programs to alleviate human  suffering?

We do spend billions to alleviate human suffering. The whole pretext of
this piece is flat-assed wrong. Typical guilt-driven Liberal hand
wringing. Without guns, there will be no butter.


>
>
>       In 1998, the United Nations Development Program estimated that
> it would cost an additional $9 billion (above current expenditures)
> to provide clean water and sanitation for everyone on earth.  It
> would cost  an additional $12 billion, they said, to cover
> reproductive health  services for all women worldwide. Another $13
> billion would be enough not only to give every person on Earth enough
> food to eat but also basic  health care. An additional $6 billion
> could provide basic education for all.

So, why doesn't the rest of the world pony up as much as we do? We're
doing way more than our share as it is, while continually being cast as
overindulgent, selfish Americans. This guy bought into that perception
foisted by people who have more death on their hands from mismanagement
than we will ever have from war or selfishness. They love to see this
reaction, this guilty self-hate, that way they can pocket the people's
money, and we give their people what they lack. What a scam


>
>      These are large numbers, but combined they add up to $40 billion
> - - only one fifth as much as the $200 billion the U.S. government
> agreed in October 2001 to pay Lockheed to build new F-35 Joint Strike
> Fighter (JSF) jets.

So, we should send that money overseas to feed the people of governments
that would love to see us fall, thereby weakening our defense. They get
twice the bang for the buck that way. Everyone loves a sucker.


>
> What if we were equally as dedicated to eradicate hunger, to provide
> clean water, to defeat infectious disease, to provide adequate jobs,
> to combat illiteracy, and to end homelessness?

If this nation cannot defend itself, then the golden titty dies. If we are
not dedicated to national defense, both in a military and
limited-immigration approach, then who the hell is going to take pour
place if we fail?

Why is it our responsibility to provide education, infrastructure,
employment and "homes" to the results of bad government all over the
world?

>
>
>     What if we understood that, today, there is no such thing as
> national security as long as the basic human needs of large portions
> of humanity are not met?"

We could divert every penny of our defense budget to "feed the hungry".
That would not change the world one iota in the long run. As long as we
pay for other people's mistakes, they have no motivation to change.

As horrible as the though is, disease, drought, man's inhumanity to man -
all these things existed long before the US was formed. Now, since our
approach is so successful, we are expected to in effect provide a security
blanket to the rest of the world, most of which will be making the same
mistakes a century from now.

You can't just throw money at problems. If that were the case, the "war on
poverty" would not be as dismal a failure as it is. Misguided Liberal
approaches only excaberate the problem, and rarely identify the true
causes of problems, thereby making it difficult to offer true solutions.

This piece is a prime example of shallow, movie-star/beauty pageant lame
ignorant bullshit, and offers not one iota of a solution, nor does it even
come close to identifying the problem. It could have been written by a
nine-year-old for the depth of understanding it shows.

What a lame piece - the writer is part of the problem, and doesn't even
know it. He probably thinks that, by writing it, he's actually done
something, when in fact, he is pissing in the wind.

>
>
> ------------------------
>
> "Man must change or die. There is no other course."
> Maitreya, the World Teacher
>

Damn straight. America knows this, that's why we prosper. Until the rest
of the world wakes up and uses us as an example, rather than as a reviled
parent with a fat checkbook, they are destined to fail. Most likely, guys
like Robbins will turn right around and blame us. What a dumb shit.

His ice cream sucked too.

Please leave the news group: alt good news out of this.  Thanks.

--

*~*Junior Mint*~*
Boo Radley is not a bad man!


"Volunteer" <Volunteer@don'treply2this.ok> wrote in message
news:7rqfvtcj73msvrhrdat2fc91vll2677p7e@4ax.com...
:
: Below is an excerpt from a recent talk by John Robbins - he chose to
: walk away from Baskin-Robbins  "... to pursue the dream of a society
: at peace with its conscience because it respects and lives in harmony
: with all life forms...."
:
: Please share this information with others.
:
: -----------------------------------------------------------------------
:
: TERROR, LOVE, AND THE STATE OF THE WORLD
:  by John Robbins, founder of EarthSave International,
: http://www.foodrevolution.org
:
:   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
:
:         Approximately 6,000 people perished in the September 11th
: attacks . . .  But those who died from the attacks on that tragic day
: were not alone. On September 11th, 35,000 children worldwide died of
: hunger. A similar number of children died on September 12th, and
: again on the 13th, and on  every single day since then.  Meanwhile,
: we in the U.S. feed 80% of our  grain harvest to livestock so that a
: people whose cholesterol levels are too high can have cheap meat.
:
:       To advance human security and control terrorism, we must not
: only find the brutality of the September 11th attacks to be totally
: intolerable. We must also find intolerable that one billion people
: worldwide struggle to survive on $1 a day, that more than one billion
: people lack access to safe drinking water, and that 3 billion people
: have inadequate access to sanitation. If we are serious about
: stopping terrorism, then our  goal must be to reduce the level of
: pollution, fear, and poverty in the  world.
:
:      The cost of our initial military  response will easily top $100
: billion (on top of our already enormous annual  defense budget of
: $342 billion).  What could we accomplish if we spent  even a small
: fraction of that much on programs to alleviate human  suffering?
:
:       In 1998, the United Nations Development Program estimated that
: it would cost an additional $9 billion (above current expenditures)
: to provide clean water and sanitation for everyone on earth.  It
: would cost  an additional $12 billion, they said, to cover
: reproductive health  services for all women worldwide. Another $13
: billion would be enough not only to give every person on Earth enough
: food to eat but also basic  health care. An additional $6 billion
: could provide basic education for all.
:
:      These are large numbers, but combined they add up to $40 billion
: - - only one fifth as much as the $200 billion the U.S. government
: agreed in October 2001 to pay Lockheed to build new F-35 Joint Strike
: Fighter (JSF) jets.
:
: What if we were equally as dedicated to eradicate hunger, to provide
: clean water, to defeat infectious disease, to provide adequate jobs,
: to combat illiteracy, and to end homelessness?
:
:     What if we understood that, today, there is no such thing as
: national security as long as the basic human needs of large portions
: of humanity are not met?"
:
: http://www.foodrevolution.org
:
: ------------------------
:
: "Man must change or die. There is no other course."
: Maitreya, the World Teacher
: http://www.shareintl.org
:
:
: .
:
:
: ...
:
:
: .......
:

Volunteer wrote:

> Below is an excerpt from a recent talk by John Robbins
>
>      The cost of our initial military  response will easily top $100
> billion (on top of our already enormous annual  defense budget of
> $342 billion).  What could we accomplish if we spent  even a small
> fraction of that much on programs to alleviate human  suffering?

What this deep thinker fails to realize is that military he criticizes
does much more than any Liberal hand-wringer has ever done to alleviate
human suffering.

My kid went on a six-month cruise as part of a first-strike, special ops
capable Marine Expeditionary Unit. It consists of three ships. It cost a
bundle to send these ships out, the hardware costs a bundle, and the
training of those servicemen on those ships costs a bundle.

Rather than dispense what most surface-skimming, fact-dodging liberal
reactionaries would assume, these expensive, highly-trained killers spend
their time providing humanitarian services, relief and protection to the
very people Mr Robbins complains on behalf of.

While he was opining on just how to solve these age-old problems, my kid:

-Helped build infrastructure in Timor, Africa, and Yemen.

-Provide military and general survival training to other militaries.

-Helped distribute food in those countries.

-Offered substantive protection and security in Timor to the victims of
the people Mr Robbins fails to recognize as the problem.

6 months at sea, no-one killed anybody - quite the opposite. I'll wager
that one deployed Marine Infantryman does more to "save the world" in 6
months than Mr. Robbins, and the head-nodders in his audience, do in a
lifetime. Yet, he'll stand there and bemoan what they cost, not even
taking into consideration what they risk not only for his benefit, but for
the benefit of the very people who's plight he so wailingly bemoans.

The US Marines *are* the Peace Corps. But you can't expect a self-hating
liberal idiot like Robbins to grasp that, any more than you can expect him
to grasp how important the JSF is. He whines about its cost, but doesn't
seem to realize the benefit. Not only will this war plane be employed to
protect him and those on who's behalf he whines, the costs of building it
*filter right back to the American people* via American workers that build
it, and companies that profit from it - and the taxes both pay.

I'm sure he's not all that concerned about the low pay that a Marine grunt
gets for his risks and efforts. Hell, in his unfocused eyes, the Marines
are the problem, not any kind of solution.

Thanks for posting his little piece-it is such an excellent example of
by-the-book Liberal bullshit.

"Steve" <invalid4U@ubet.net> wrote in message
news:3BF80BAA.3E4D1E9E@ubet.net...

And you wouldn't be at all biased??

> What this deep thinker fails to realize is that military he criticizes
> does much more than any Liberal hand-wringer has ever done to alleviate
> human suffering.
>
> My kid went on a six-month cruise as part of a first-strike, special ops
> capable Marine Expeditionary Unit.
(Snip)

Oh, not in the least :)

galalala wrote:

> "Steve" <invalid4U@ubet.net> wrote in message
> news:3BF80BAA.3E4D1E9E@ubet.net...
>
> And you wouldn't be at all biased??
>
> > What this deep thinker fails to realize is that military he criticizes
> > does much more than any Liberal hand-wringer has ever done to alleviate
> > human suffering.
> >
> > My kid went on a six-month cruise as part of a first-strike, special ops
> > capable Marine Expeditionary Unit.
> (Snip)

Volunteer wrote:
> 
> Below is an excerpt from a recent talk by John Robbins - he chose to
> walk away from Baskin-Robbins  "... to pursue the dream of a society
> at peace with its conscience because it respects and lives in harmony
> with all life forms...."
> 
> Please share this information with others.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> TERROR, LOVE, AND THE STATE OF THE WORLD
>  by John Robbins, founder of EarthSave International,
> http://www.foodrevolution.org
> 
>   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
> 
>         Approximately 6,000 people perished in the September 11th
> attacks . . .  But those who died from the attacks on that tragic day
> were not alone. On September 11th, 35,000 children worldwide died of
> hunger. A similar number of children died on September 12th, and
> again on the 13th, and on  every single day since then.  Meanwhile,
> we in the U.S. feed 80% of our  grain harvest to livestock so that a
> people whose cholesterol levels are too high can have cheap meat.
> 


So what?  We earned the right by working hard among other things.



>       To advance human security and control terrorism, we must not
> only find the brutality of the September 11th attacks to be totally
> intolerable. We must also find intolerable that one billion people
> worldwide struggle to survive on $1 a day, that more than one billion
> people lack access to safe drinking water, and that 3 billion people
> have inadequate access to sanitation. If we are serious about
> stopping terrorism, then our  goal must be to reduce the level of
> pollution, fear, and poverty in the  world.
> 


No, what needs to be "reduced," is explosive population growth.



>      The cost of our initial military  response will easily top $100
> billion (on top of our already enormous annual  defense budget of
> $342 billion).  What could we accomplish if we spent  even a small
> fraction of that much on programs to alleviate human  suffering?
> 



Our defense budget and activities permits whiners like you to spew nonsense.



>       In 1998, the United Nations Development Program estimated that
> it would cost an additional $9 billion (above current expenditures)
> to provide clean water and sanitation for everyone on earth.  It
> would cost  an additional $12 billion, they said, to cover
> reproductive health  services for all women worldwide. Another $13
> billion would be enough not only to give every person on Earth enough
> food to eat but also basic  health care. An additional $6 billion
> could provide basic education for all.
> 


...and why should we pay?



>      These are large numbers, but combined they add up to $40 billion
> - - only one fifth as much as the $200 billion the U.S. government
> agreed in October 2001 to pay Lockheed to build new F-35 Joint Strike
> Fighter (JSF) jets.
> 


Sounds like apples 'n oranges to me... What does on have to do with the other?



> What if we were equally as dedicated to eradicate hunger, to provide
> clean water, to defeat infectious disease, to provide adequate jobs,
> to combat illiteracy, and to end homelessness?
> 



Has any black hole ever been filled?  I think not!



>     What if we understood that, today, there is no such thing as
> national security as long as the basic human needs of large portions
> of humanity are not met?"
> 
>



Dream on............




-- 
Regards,

JT (Residing in Austin, Texas)

Just Tooling Down The Internet Superhighway With my G4.......

Steve obviously believes in the trickle-down, voodoo economics of Ronald
Reagan.  Give the military Billions and the ensuing contractors float all
economic boats.  It was horse-crap then and now.  Profits go to
stockholders.  Who owns stock?  Those with disposable income.  Who needs
economic help?  Those without disposable income.  How does he figure?

The JSF is hust another pork-barrel boondoggle to get some politician
re-elected.  Our air supremacy is unchallenged now and will be far into the
future with existing infrastructure.

By the way, if you think that any of these military contractors like
Lockheed-Martin and General Dynamics are paying taxes of any consequence,
you're in a fantasy world.

I don't think that right-wingers have an exclusive franchise on patriotism,
nor do left-wingers have one on compassion.  Let's be clear about who's
getting our tax dollars, though.

Jim


"Steve" <invalid4U@ubet.net> wrote in message
news:3BF80BAA.3E4D1E9E@ubet.net...
>
>
> Volunteer wrote:
>
> > Below is an excerpt from a recent talk by John Robbins
> >
> >      The cost of our initial military  response will easily top $100
> > billion (on top of our already enormous annual  defense budget of
> > $342 billion).  What could we accomplish if we spent  even a small
> > fraction of that much on programs to alleviate human  suffering?
>
> What this deep thinker fails to realize is that military he criticizes
> does much more than any Liberal hand-wringer has ever done to alleviate
> human suffering.
>
> My kid went on a six-month cruise as part of a first-strike, special ops
> capable Marine Expeditionary Unit. It consists of three ships. It cost a
> bundle to send these ships out, the hardware costs a bundle, and the
> training of those servicemen on those ships costs a bundle.
>
> Rather than dispense what most surface-skimming, fact-dodging liberal
> reactionaries would assume, these expensive, highly-trained killers spend
> their time providing humanitarian services, relief and protection to the
> very people Mr Robbins complains on behalf of.
>
> While he was opining on just how to solve these age-old problems, my kid:
>
> -Helped build infrastructure in Timor, Africa, and Yemen.
>
> -Provide military and general survival training to other militaries.
>
> -Helped distribute food in those countries.
>
> -Offered substantive protection and security in Timor to the victims of
> the people Mr Robbins fails to recognize as the problem.
>
> 6 months at sea, no-one killed anybody - quite the opposite. I'll wager
> that one deployed Marine Infantryman does more to "save the world" in 6
> months than Mr. Robbins, and the head-nodders in his audience, do in a
> lifetime. Yet, he'll stand there and bemoan what they cost, not even
> taking into consideration what they risk not only for his benefit, but for
> the benefit of the very people who's plight he so wailingly bemoans.
>
> The US Marines *are* the Peace Corps. But you can't expect a self-hating
> liberal idiot like Robbins to grasp that, any more than you can expect him
> to grasp how important the JSF is. He whines about its cost, but doesn't
> seem to realize the benefit. Not only will this war plane be employed to
> protect him and those on who's behalf he whines, the costs of building it
> *filter right back to the American people* via American workers that build
> it, and companies that profit from it - and the taxes both pay.
>
> I'm sure he's not all that concerned about the low pay that a Marine grunt
> gets for his risks and efforts. Hell, in his unfocused eyes, the Marines
> are the problem, not any kind of solution.
>
> Thanks for posting his little piece-it is such an excellent example of
> by-the-book Liberal bullshit.
>
>
>
>
>

Jim Hungerford wrote:

> Steve obviously believes in the trickle-down, voodoo economics of Ronald
> Reagan.  Give the military Billions and the ensuing contractors float all
> economic boats.  It was horse-crap then and now.  Profits go to
> stockholders.  Who owns stock?  Those with disposable income.  Who needs
> economic help?  Those without disposable income.  How does he figure?

What a bunch of lame assumptions. Welcome to the world of clich� liberalism.

Are stockholders the enemy? They're you and I.

Tell em how profiting from stock is inherently evil, or the exclusive arena of
the "rich".

>
> The JSF is hust another pork-barrel boondoggle to get some politician
> re-elected.  Our air supremacy is unchallenged now and will be far into the
> future with existing infrastructure.

Oh, a military expert.

So we don't need a cross-branch, more viable, cost effective fighter plane. You
haven't got the faintest idea what the JSF represents.


>
>
> By the way, if you think that any of these military contractors like
> Lockheed-Martin and General Dynamics are paying taxes of any consequence,
> you're in a fantasy world.

Not yours, to be sure. I live in a Lockheed town, I know what an economic
engine they are. They pay taxes, and so do the people that work for them.

>
> I don't think that right-wingers have an exclusive franchise on patriotism,
> nor do left-wingers have one on compassion.  Let's be clear about who's
> getting our tax dollars, though.
>
> Jim

So, among all the tax dollars blatantly wasted, your beef is with a viable,
smart defensive weapon built in the US by Americans. A defensive weapon we
need. Maybe you think that the money devoted to this project should go "feed
people". Well, guess what, people get fed, we build our weapon. No-one loses,
and we have a better means to protect the golden titty.

And it will help keep people alive to be fed. Imagine that.

"Steve" <invalid4U@ubet.net> wrote in message news:3BF80162.B0AF98B1@ubet.net...
|
|
| Volunteer wrote:
|
| > Below is an excerpt from a recent talk by John Robbins - he chose to
| > walk away from Baskin-Robbins  "... to pursue the dream of a society
| > at peace with its conscience because it respects and lives in harmony
| > with all life forms...."
| >
| > Please share this information with others.
| >
| > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
| >
| > TERROR, LOVE, AND THE STATE OF THE WORLD
| >  by John Robbins, founder of EarthSave International,
| > http://www.foodrevolution.org
| >
| >   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
| >
| >         Approximately 6,000 people perished in the September 11th
| > attacks . . .  But those who died from the attacks on that tragic day
| > were not alone. On September 11th, 35,000 children worldwide died of
| > hunger. A similar number of children died on September 12th, and
| > again on the 13th, and on  every single day since then.  Meanwhile,
| > we in the U.S. feed 80% of our  grain harvest to livestock so that a
| > people whose cholesterol levels are too high can have cheap meat.
|
| Because, that's what we eat.
|
| The starving children cited are starving primarily because their
| governments put them in that position.
|
| So, by diverting our grains from beef to starving children, we in effect
| subsidize bad government. Why is the failure to properly govern and manage
| resources for the good of the people, as we do here in the US, constantly
| laid at our door?
|
| Perhaps a more realistic and long-lasting strategy is for these people to
| revolt against bad government, rather than have the US continually enable
| them via our tax dollars.
|
| Is the aim to raise the rest of the world to our level, or bring us down
| to theirs?

I couldn't have said it better....right on!


massive snip>

| Damn straight. America knows this, that's why we prosper. Until the rest
| of the world wakes up and uses us as an example, rather than as a reviled
| parent with a fat checkbook, they are destined to fail. Most likely, guys
| like Robbins will turn right around and blame us. What a dumb shit.
|
| His ice cream sucked too.
|
|
yup.
 We have the most advanced and best culture of this world.
And somehow the morons, the pc police and liberal left all seem to
think that the abject failures of this world, along with their pathetic
lozer cultures and their in-bred ways will somehow enchance the
American culture if only we allow teeming millions of them to
come over and fester in our cities like scaby yellow pustules on
the healthy skin of the world's most advanced and enlightened culure
it has ever seen.

mapi