🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <ucydnQi5l5yDoc3RnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
 mrmcafee <"(mrmcafee)nospam"@cox.net> wrote:

> Billy wrote:
> > In article <RJKdnQNnjc9LbdPRnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >  mrmcafee <"(mrmcafee)nospam"@cox.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> Billy wrote:
> >>> In article <0MCdnV4aebO2A9DRnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>>  mrmcafee <"(mrmcafee)nospam"@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Jim wrote:
> >>>>> Billy wrote:
> >>>>> [....]
> >>>>>> Misdirection again, away from the real criminals who are concentrated 
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>> Washington D.C. and Wall Street, to the bread crumb sin variety, 
> >>>>>> trying
> >>>>>> to feed their families. Immigrants aren't $tealing trillion$ of 
> >>>>>> dollar$,
> >>>>>> folks. The people $tealing trillionS of dollar$ are investment 
> >>>>>> bankers,
> >>>>>> the military-industrial complex, and their "bought and paid" for
> >>>>>> politicians in both parties, the Kleptocrats. Ain't nothin gonna 
> >>>>>> change
> >>>>>> without campaign-finance reform, re-installment of Glass-Steagall act,
> >>>>>> and the sheep get off their asses and demand change. Otherwise,
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> - Billy
> >>>>> but but but the sheepeople love their gubberment. 
> >>>> We do. We much prefer it to the libertarian system employed in Somalia.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> lol
> >>> Somalia has no central government, it is partitioned among warlord. 
> >>> Whereas here, the central government is unified in its support for 
> >>> corporations, and those who own stock in them.
> >>
> >> As well as support for unions and for Grandmas. Our government is the 
> >> reason we can progress as a civilization. If you want to see the results 
> >> of libertarian 
> > Funny, my dictionary describes a libertarian as : a person who advocates 
> > civil liberty
> 
> 
> The way I used the term and the way we have been using it in these 
> forums is as defined by the Libertarian Party of the USA. Their defining 
> characteristic is (from their "Statement of Principles)
> 
> "We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion 
> over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they 
> choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right 
> of others to live in whatever manner they choose."
> http://tinyurl.com/2ahk5a2
> 
> They believe that each individual is sovereign. Anarchy.
> 
> 
> > You don't support civil liberty? Hmmm.
> 
> Of course I do. I'm a Democrat.
> 
> 
> > Odd. I don't remember ever 
> > hearing tell of a libertarian government.
> 
> An impossibility.
> 
> 
> > Bolivia under Evo Morales, 
> > maybe.
> 
> I see you are very confused.
> 
I'm trying to communicate with you. What does that tell ya?

If you want an example of a nurturing government, Bolivia is it. No, not 
nurturing to the rich and powerful, but to the common citizen.
Viva Evo. 
> 
> >> style political philosphy, look to Somalia. 
> > Somalia, of course is an area, like Afghanistan that is ruled by 
> > competing warlords. There almost an unity of government (Islamic Courts 
> > Union), but it was one that was unacceptable to western powers, and it 
> > wasn't allowed to unify the country because of the introduction of US 
> > supported Kenyan and Ethiopian troops (land grabs don'cha' know)
> 
> 
> Just more libertarian style rule. There is no government to restrain the 
> powerful and protect the weak.
Uh, but you said "the defining characteristic Libertarian Party of the 
USA is (from their "Statement of Principles)". "We hold that all 
individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own 
lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so 
long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to 
live in whatever manner they choose."
http://tinyurl.com/2ahk5a2

It's a contradiction in terms to have a libertarian tyranny, duuuuh.

> 
> 
> > 
> >> Take a lesson
> >> from Lebanon during the Eighties. 
> >  Lebanon was twice invaded and occupied by the Israel Defense Forces 
> > (IDF) in 1978 and 1982,[36] with the PLO expelled in the second 
> > invasion. Israel remained in control of Southern Lebanon until 2000, 
> > when there was a general decision, led by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud 
> > Barak, to withdraw because of continuous attacks executed by Hezbollah, 
> > and a belief that the violence would diminish and dissolve without the 
> > Israeli presence in Lebanon.
> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon#Civil_war_and_beyond>
> > I'm sure we all remember the Israel bombing apartment house in Beirut. 
> > The war was to install a pro western government, Israeli backed (US 
> > supported) Shia/Maronite coalition, in opposition to the Sunnis.
> > "The Israeli-Maronite alliance was shattered, and Sharon's goal of 
> > installing a pro-Israel Christian government in Beirut was not 
> > accomplished.[83] 850,000 Christians would emigrate during the Civil 
> > War, most of them permanently."
> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Lebanon_War>
> 
> During the civil war, government broke down to the point that only the 
> powerful had any control over their lives and the weak were at their 
> mercy. 
Even without a civil war, this what government does. It establishes an 
elite class that is supported by the workers. It has been thus, ever 
since Mesopotamia.

It had nothing to do with with organized anarchy, but everything to do 
with the competing interests of the US and Israel, and their local 
clients (Shia/Maronite coalition), competing with the Syria/Sunnis. 
Simply put, competing for power, land, and money. 
Heaven help the poor nationalist that got caught in that meat grinder.

>The predictable results of a libertarian non-government.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it 
means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many 
different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's 
all."

So, wha'chew smokin', mrmcafee?

It was the perfectly predictable results of American hegemony. Where are 
your military tax dollars now, mrmcafee? When diplomacy and the CIA 
doesn't work, send the Marines.
-----

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most 
vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one 
in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.
A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it 
seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows 
what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at 
the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the 
conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in 
the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge 
blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires 
falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them 
dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a 
rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened 
nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of 
them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded 
or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. 
They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited 
by the few � the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. 
The general public shoulders the bill.

And what is this bill?

This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. 
Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic 
instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking 
taxation for generations and generations."

 - Major General Smedley Darlington Butler, U.S. Marine Corps
<http://www.amazon.com/War-Racket-Antiwar-Americas-Decorated/dp/092291586
5/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1280335588&sr=1-1>
> 
> 
> > 
> > 
> >> Everyplace government breaks down, 
> >> anarchy takes place and freedom is gone except for the strong and the 
> >> ruthless. 

So, you're a "Social Darwinist", red fang and claw, and all that? The 
excuse that capitalists have used through the 20th century, to justify 
their success at the expense of the workers.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/28/business/28wages.html>
Real Wages Fail to Match a Rise in Productivity

<http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/steffy/5954471.html>
Corporations not pulling weight on taxes
By LOREN STEFFY Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
A study released by the Government Accountability Office last week found 
that almost two-thirds of American companies didn't pay corporate income 
tax annually from 1998 to 2005. . .
As I read the report, I kept thinking about the drumbeat from the 
business lobby and administration officials like Henry Paulson who argue 
that U.S. companies are losing their competitive edge because their 
taxes are too high.

> > So, you're recommending colonial governments then, right?
> 
> 
> No, I recommend chocolate ice cream.

Definitely a "stoner";O)  

What we have now is a despotic, corporate government, that attempts to 
portray itself as being democratic, bringing liberty, free markets, and 
apple pie to the masses. It is colonialism, without the need to travel.
> 
> 
> >> There is a reason there are no communist nor libertarian 
> >> societies of any size in the world. They are unnatural.
> >> in Somalia
> > 
> > You really gibber a lot, don't you
> 
> 
> Rather the other way 'round.

Oh, you are soooo clever ;O)
-- 
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the 
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/28/naomi_klein_the_real_crime_scene