China tells Obama, 'We own the United States'

POSTED BY: piratenews
UPDATED: Thursday, November 26, 2009 14:59
VIEWED: 4564
PAGE 1 of 1

PIRATENEWS

Monday, November 23, 2009 8:15 PM

Full Video: www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/clips/china-cold-open/1178451/

GINOBIFFARONI

Monday, November 23, 2009 8:21 PM

I wish they will soon foreclose and kick all the Washington assholes to the curb

Tom Clancy sure got that one ass backwards lmao

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

BYTEMITE

Monday, November 23, 2009 8:50 PM

I'd love to see the corrupt get their comeuppance as well, but I hope I'm dead at the time. I see nothing to indicate that the Chinese won't be anything but brutal towards all Americans, not just our government. The whole thing could precipitate a hostile Chinese takeover. What are goverments nowadays but big corporations? Same principle.

PIRATENEWS

Monday, November 23, 2009 9:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I'd love to see the corrupt get their comeuppance as well, but I hope I'm dead at the time. I see nothing to indicate that the Chinese won't be anything but brutal towards all Americans, not just our government.

If Obama's masters like Brezinski have their way with US, WW3 will include China nuking USA.

China owns the Panama Canal, most US ports, and US airports like Memphis TN have most signs in Chinese.

At least SNL finally grew some nuts. I wonder how many writers got fired after that epp?

GINOBIFFARONI

Monday, November 23, 2009 10:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I'd love to see the corrupt get their comeuppance as well, but I hope I'm dead at the time. I see nothing to indicate that the Chinese won't be anything but brutal towards all Americans, not just our government. The whole thing could precipitate a hostile Chinese takeover. What are goverments nowadays but big corporations? Same principle.

I think the fear is overrated

when the United States is broken into Special Administrative Regions, similar to Hong Kong but likely five or six areas due to the size of the US there will be no reason for brutality.

The focus will move to productivity or manufacturing away from the artificial promotion of Wall street and casino economics.

Any brutality towards Americans will be due to either arrogance and ignorance ( no shortage )... or more likely folk conducting domestic terrorism against the new boss in a vain effort to maintain the failed experiment in which they were the slaves but just didn't know it.

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

BYTEMITE

Monday, November 23, 2009 10:13 PM

Quote:
I think the fear is overrated

when the United States is broken into Special Administrative Regions, similar to Hong Kong but likely five or six areas due to the size of the US there will be no reason for brutality.

The focus will move to productivity or manufacturing away from the artificial promotion of Wall street and casino economics.

Any brutality towards Americans will be due to either arrogance and ignorance ( no shortage )... or more likely folk conducting domestic terrorism against the new boss in a vain effort to maintain the failed experiment in which they were the slaves but just didn't know it.

Granted we're in a slave experiment now, but just because we'd "just" be under a new slave experiment with China doesn't mean that wouldn't be WORSE.

You really don't think the Chinese wouldn't lord it over the American population? Really? I see Americans as being unlikely to swear loyalty to the new Chinese overlords, which China will crack down on, HARD, like they do to their own population, or populations they consider under their jurisdiction (Tibet, Nepal, the borderland tribes). Surprisingly, Chinese Americans would most likely suffer the worst of it, as they might potentially be seen as traitors to the homeland.

PIRATENEWS

Monday, November 23, 2009 10:25 PM

The slave experiment will result in US factories owned by Commie China. In China managers who fail to meet their quota are marched out back and get a bullet in the head. Next!

www.reddawn2010.com

GINOBIFFARONI

Monday, November 23, 2009 11:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:
I think the fear is overrated

when the United States is broken into Special Administrative Regions, similar to Hong Kong but likely five or six areas due to the size of the US there will be no reason for brutality.

The focus will move to productivity or manufacturing away from the artificial promotion of Wall street and casino economics.

Any brutality towards Americans will be due to either arrogance and ignorance ( no shortage )... or more likely folk conducting domestic terrorism against the new boss in a vain effort to maintain the failed experiment in which they were the slaves but just didn't know it.

Granted we're in a slave experiment now, but just because we'd "just" be under a new slave experiment with China doesn't mean that wouldn't be WORSE.

You really don't think the Chinese wouldn't lord it over the American population? Really? I see Americans as being unlikely to swear loyalty to the new Chinese overlords, which China will crack down on, HARD, like they do to their own population, or populations they consider under their jurisdiction (Tibet, Nepal, the borderland tribes). Surprisingly, Chinese Americans would most likely suffer the worst of it, as they might potentially be seen as traitors to the homeland.

If you think of Hong Kong as the example instead of Tibet ( I doubt they would try a homerule type scenario, that would be as unworkable as what is going on in Afghanistan )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong

They don't care about loyalty, they want business as usual, or perhaps with more efficiency.. Doubt they would bail GM out...

They want a massive return on their massive investment, so productivity, jobs, profits all become the important thing.

They wanted production out of Hong Kong so they made it a Special Administrative Region... kept what was working, working and only changed the things that didn't... and even then minimally.

I think the Chinese recognize the limitations of their system, and why it wouldn't work anywhere and everywhere ( unlike Americans ) China is gradually changing, but will never change overnight, look at the Russians and the chaos that caused.

Any " takeover " would probably benefit the American people, a move away from the propped up economic system which seems to reward failure, and periodically fall apart completely. As with Hong Kong, they would leave a system of representation, but not one where the representative acts against the common good as easily anyway. Likely the same faces as now too, just delete the influence of the Lobbyists and Special Interest Groups.

The only problem with this idea, is also the reason why China is so slow with its own changes. Once PN and the thousands of misguided folk started running around with their weapons playing Red Dawn shooting up whatever, that act of domestic terror will trigger the crackdown you fear. And it won't be China they are fighting, China will simply deploy whatever is left of the US military against them backed up by Blackwater and their ilk.

China cannot and will not tolerate any insurgency... read about the effects of the Boxer rebellion, or the warlord era, or the post WW2 civil war... they will put down any use of arms against them quickly and brutally to prevent its spread, mind you that is the right of a country to put down insurrectionists...

Chinese Americans may suffer worst of all, but i would bet that suffering would be at the hands of " American Patriots " more so than China

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

PIRATENEWS

Monday, November 23, 2009 11:32 PM

To cut the head off Commie China, you must first decapitate the jewish banksters in NY City, London, Europe and Israel that own the stock markets and central banks that counterfeit all money and seize all fed taxes. A head-to-head battle with any nation is doomed to failure. We can't even beat Vietnam, Iraq or Afghanistan.

NY City's Empire State Building glows red in honor of 60th anniversary of Communist China
www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=111400

"As far as Chinese goes, I resented it."
-Alan Tudyk, The Making of Firefly
(video censored by youtube)

KWICKO

Monday, November 23, 2009 11:35 PM

So did anyone else notice that it was a SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE sketch?

BYTEMITE

Monday, November 23, 2009 11:46 PM

You're... saying... It would be okay to to have a Chinese takeover if they introduced stability?

NIKI2

Monday, November 23, 2009 11:46 PM

Yes, hee, hee, hee, I was wondering about that.

I don't see a takeover; I think we would be too cumbersome to govern, and they pretty much have, or will have as things are going, just about where they want us.

I don't think they'd fancy another revolution of the size and capability the American people would put forth if they tried.

Color me naive maybe, but I think the financial takeover is working quite well, thank you, albeit slowly.

KWICKO

Monday, November 23, 2009 11:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
You're... saying... It would be okay to to have a Chinese takeover if they introduced stability?

Huh? Was that aimed at me?

It might come in handy to hit "Reply with Quote" on some of these.

I wasn't saying ANYTHING, except that PN's "source" for the imminent ChiCom takeover of the United States is... an SNL sketch. I wonder if he can corroborate that "news" with some confirmation from The Onion. Or FauxNews. Either of them are about the same.

GINOBIFFARONI

Monday, November 23, 2009 11:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
You're... saying... It would be okay to to have a Chinese takeover if they introduced stability?

Americans overlords, Chinese overlords...

at least the chinese would try to make productive changes

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

PIRATENEWS

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
So did anyone else notice that it was a SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE sketch?

The best humor is Truth. Obama has already borrowed more money than all other US presidents combined. Commie China is the largest lender to the US Govt.

Quote:
In May 2009, the US owed China $772 billion.

The debt limit was most recently raised to $12.104 trillion by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (H.R.1), which was signed into law on February 17, 2009 (P.L. 111-5).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

Total actual debt obligations of US Govt is $70-trillion. That's $230,000 debt for every US citizen, not counting interest and late penalties. No way to recover from that.

"Not one dime of income taxes goes to support any federal program."
-President Ronald Reagan, right before George Bushes' CIA cousin John Hinkley Jr shot him
(released from loonybin by George Bush Jr and Hussein Obama Soetoro)

NIKI2

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:04 AM

Jezus no, Gino, how can you say that? ...we've never been taken over by a foreign power and I don't want us to be. We muddle through--not well, but you really think China has managed "stability"??? If not, then how can you conceive they could manage it here?

Given their human-rights attitude, I think it would be totally disasterous and, as I said, quickly lead to a revolution I don't think they're interested in having.

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:16 AM

I think the US needs change,... change that will not come from within

Obama was the last hope... and he failed

the citizens of the US cannot get their gov under control so why not hope someone kicks the anthill...

change through conflict

How many have suffered from American sponsored regime change... maybe a little regime change at home would be good for the soul

Go Vorlons Go

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:24 AM

Kwicko: No, that was directed towards Gino, who right now, no offense or anything, is kinda making me go o.0

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:30 AM

Quote:
Americans overlords, Chinese overlords...

at least the chinese would try to make productive changes

Because PRODUCTION is all that matters. People? Not so much. That right?

Quote:
How many have suffered from American sponsored regime change... maybe a little regime change at home would be good for the soul

Yeah, so because some Americans are douchebags who have made mistakes, BAD mistakes, sometimes even foul INTENTIONAL AWFUL policy, all Americans should immediately suffer a regime change under brutal communist China so the rest of the world can get some mother fucking REVENGE. That what you saying? Sure sounds like it to me!

I don't like my American government. I don't like the people from either party, I don't like how it works, and I even would go so far as to say I think our constitution is flawed, and hell, that we've probably even deviated from the spirit of it's intent right from the beginning.

But I'm not about to start advocating a whole bunch of innocent, if ignorant people have to start suffering because of what other people have done. You want a comparison to the middle east? What you're proposing is like saying we should kill and oppress all the Muslims because a few of them are extremists.

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Kwicko: No, that was directed towards Gino, who right now, no offense or anything, is kinda making me go o.0

Sorry don't mean to upset you,

just it my view I condemn the United States and China as equals. As partners or as a boss / employee as they effect the rest of the world I would say the US is worse. At least China acts the way it does to preserve order...

You have another view, I respect that. But I'll debate the other side as long as you like, because in the long view I think I'm right.

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:33 AM

Rofl,

I thought that was pretty funny.

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:
Americans overlords, Chinese overlords...

at least the chinese would try to make productive changes

Because PRODUCTION is all that matters. People? Not so much. That right?

Quote:
How many have suffered from American sponsored regime change... maybe a little regime change at home would be good for the soul

Yeah, so because some Americans are douchebags who have made mistakes, BAD mistakes, sometimes even foul INTENTIONAL AWFUL policy, all Americans should immediately suffer a regime change under brutal communist China so the rest of the world can get some mother fucking REVENGE. That what you saying? Sure sounds like it to me!

I don't like my American government. I don't like how it works, and I even would go so far as to say I think our constitution is flawed, and hell, that we've probably even deviated from the spirit of it's intent right from the beginning.

But I'm not about to start advocating a whole bunch of innocent, if ignorant people have to start suffering because of what other people have done. You want a comparison to the middle east? What you're proposing is like saying we should kill and oppress all the Muslims because a few of them are extremists.

Who is calling to kill or oppress anyone ?

If the focus is more on productivity... then the unemployment rate would drop significantly would it not?

And I am saying if there would be any violence it would be started by Americans fighting for a half understood cause, for the benefit of people and a system who treated them the same or worse for the past fifty years....

Say if they started fighting the present US gov in the same way, would not the FBI / Homeland Security / US military crackdown be quite brutal ?

Revenge... Not so much. Change. How many times do we need to repeat the cycle before change becomes necessary. The US cannot escape its two party, with the candidates prescreened by TPTB system without outside intervention...

Any violence would be started by Americans

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Rofl,

I thought that was pretty funny.

Which part?

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:50 AM

Apparently you don't think the Chinese government is oppressive?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989

Once again, o.0 ???

And it sure sounds like there'd be Americans killed, especially if the Chinese government labeled our "freedom fighters" insurgents.

But anyway. I have to object to this, again, because productivity is NOT the most important thing here.

I'd also suggest that China itself is not so much about productivity as it is busy work and feeding frivolous consumerism.

But... Your point about the US government and the staying power of the two party system and our national security forces is well taken.

I'm just saying that there has to be a better and less horrifying solution than a Chinese takeover.

KWICKO

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:04 AM

Quote:

Yeah, so because some Americans are douchebags who have made mistakes, BAD mistakes, sometimes even foul INTENTIONAL AWFUL policy, all Americans should immediately suffer a regime change under brutal communist China so the rest of the world can get some mother fucking REVENGE. That what you saying? Sure sounds like it to me!

I don't like my American government. I don't like the people, I don't like how it works, and I even would go so far as to say I think our constitution is flawed, and hell, that we've probably even deviated from the spirit of it's intent right from the beginning.

Byte, you should know Gino better than that. He's yanking your Yankee chain.

What Gino's pointing out is that there are those outside the U.S. who could actually make a pretty good case to the UN that America NEEDS regime change for the safety and benefit of the free world, that we are a rogue nation led by a series of despots. And since China IS a pretty stable government these days, might not they be the best ones to inflict a new government on us?

It's just another way of having an OBJECTIVE look at what we did in Iraq, and saying that the same case could be made against us, if someone really had a mind to.

And the saddest part, the part that really breaks my heart? He's not wrong.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Apparently you don't think the Chinese government is oppressive?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989

Once again, o.0 ???

And it sure sounds like there'd be Americans killed, especially if the Chinese government labeled our "freedom fighters" insurgents.

But anyway. I have to object to this, again, because productivity is NOT the most important thing here.

I'd also suggest that China itself is not so much about productivity as it is busy work and feeding frivolous consumerism.

But... Your point about the US government and the staying power of the two party system and our national security forces is well taken.

I'm just saying that there has to be a better and less horrifying solution than a Chinese takeover.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_Siege

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Farm

I know what you are trying to say about my productivity point...

but is it better to have people lose their homes, to have them not able to feed, clothe, or provide healthcare to their family's ?

When say a car company decides to build 300 top end SUVs instead of 3000 base models because the profit margins are higher on the SUVs... and lay off 800 workers in the process... is that really to the benefit of people ?

frivolous consumerism ? is that not an American invention ?

Please... what is a better way? the Chinese already have bought the US economy... I think that is an opportunity

but if there is a better idea ? we have discussed this in other threads, and I see much frustration on this issue... but no realistic solutions... and with a Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin vote looming in the future .....

( and yes that does scare me, one is evil and knows it, they other a pawn of evil and doesn't understand it )

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:47 AM

I'm familiar with all those events. What you don't seem to be understanding here is that if China were to be in control of America, I couldn't even be posting on this message board right now.

I guess that's one way to win this argument...

Quote:
but is it better to have people lose their homes, to have them not able to feed, clothe, or provide healthcare to their family's ?

They have that in China... That's not just an American thing...

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Yeah, so because some Americans are douchebags who have made mistakes, BAD mistakes, sometimes even foul INTENTIONAL AWFUL policy, all Americans should immediately suffer a regime change under brutal communist China so the rest of the world can get some mother fucking REVENGE. That what you saying? Sure sounds like it to me!

I don't like my American government. I don't like the people, I don't like how it works, and I even would go so far as to say I think our constitution is flawed, and hell, that we've probably even deviated from the spirit of it's intent right from the beginning.

Byte, you should know Gino better than that. He's yanking your Yankee chain.

What Gino's pointing out is that there are those outside the U.S. who could actually make a pretty good case to the UN that America NEEDS regime change for the safety and benefit of the free world, that we are a rogue nation led by a series of despots. And since China IS a pretty stable government these days, might not they be the best ones to inflict a new government on us?

It's just another way of having an OBJECTIVE look at what we did in Iraq, and saying that the same case could be made against us, if someone really had a mind to.

And the saddest part, the part that really breaks my heart? He's not wrong.

Yeah, but I never supported Iraq OR Afghanistan. And I'm getting the idea that Gino actually seems to think this would be a good idea. It wasn't a good idea for Iraq or Afghanistan!

So yes it's wrong! It was wrong then, and it's wrong in this imaginary scenario.

There are better ways to ruin the US government, and lucky for us, they're doing all of them all by themselves.

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I'm familiar with all those events. What you don't seem to be understanding here is that if China were to be in control of America, I couldn't even be posting on this message board right now.

I guess that's one way to win this argument...

Quote:
but is it better to have people lose their homes, to have them not able to feed, clothe, or provide healthcare to their family's ?

They have that in China... That's not just an American thing...

No, instead we can chat as much as we liked monitored by your American security services subject to investigation and or arrest if they decide they want to...

I am sure China will expand their internet " freedoms " when their infrastructure allows them the same level of monitoring and control...

Now is the illusion of freedom much different that the perceived absence of freedom?

As for employment... my point is the Chinese government views job creation as something very important to combat social unrest

The current stimulus process in the US seems to provide bankers / investment houses with relief in the hopes of eventual job creation as a side effect. I watched a couple Senators last sunday on a program say no jobs have been created by the stimulus money yet, but they think some will come by the beginning of the second quarter next year.... is that good enough ?

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

Yeah, so because some Americans are douchebags who have made mistakes, BAD mistakes, sometimes even foul INTENTIONAL AWFUL policy, all Americans should immediately suffer a regime change under brutal communist China so the rest of the world can get some mother fucking REVENGE. That what you saying? Sure sounds like it to me!

I don't like my American government. I don't like the people, I don't like how it works, and I even would go so far as to say I think our constitution is flawed, and hell, that we've probably even deviated from the spirit of it's intent right from the beginning.

Byte, you should know Gino better than that. He's yanking your Yankee chain.

What Gino's pointing out is that there are those outside the U.S. who could actually make a pretty good case to the UN that America NEEDS regime change for the safety and benefit of the free world, that we are a rogue nation led by a series of despots. And since China IS a pretty stable government these days, might not they be the best ones to inflict a new government on us?

It's just another way of having an OBJECTIVE look at what we did in Iraq, and saying that the same case could be made against us, if someone really had a mind to.

And the saddest part, the part that really breaks my heart? He's not wrong.

Yeah, but I never supported Iraq OR Afghanistan. And I'm getting the idea that Gino actually seems to think this would be a good idea. It wasn't a good idea for Iraq or Afghanistan!

So yes it's wrong! It was wrong then, and it's wrong in this imaginary scenario.

There are better ways to ruin the US government, and lucky for us, they're doing all of them all by themselves.

So where is your end game then ?

Allow things to go on as they are, maybe start another war with Iran... one your even less likely to find success in

maybe default on your international loans dragging the rest of the planets economic system down with you

where will this go in the next decade ?

BTW I think Afghanistan could have worked, I think it was tanked in the execution... and probably is beyond fixing now...

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

PIRATENEWS

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

The current stimulus process in the US seems to provide bankers / investment houses with relief in the hopes of eventual job creation as a side effect. I watched a couple Senators last sunday on a program say no jobs have been created by the stimulus money yet, but they think some will come by the beginning of the second quarter next year.... is that good enough ?

The Free Healthcare Tax is just another bailout for the insurance corporations who wrote the bill, that Congress is neither allowed nor willing to read. 30-million Americans will still be without health insurance...

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by piratenews:
Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

The current stimulus process in the US seems to provide bankers / investment houses with relief in the hopes of eventual job creation as a side effect. I watched a couple Senators last sunday on a program say no jobs have been created by the stimulus money yet, but they think some will come by the beginning of the second quarter next year.... is that good enough ?

The Free Healthcare Tax is just another bailout for the insurance corporations who wrote the bill, that Congress is neither allowed nor willing to read. 30-million Americans will still be without health insurance...

That is why it was important to keep a public system option on the table...

sadly

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 3:32 AM

And yet, the moment America starts tanking, everyone is already talking about shifting to other currencies, etc.

Most countries have seen for a while America has been going down the tubes, I expect many of them have contingency plans. The ones who have been planning the furthest ahead would become the new global economy foundation.

The countries most effected would be Europe, but America crashing wouldn't be the end of the world. You've been listening to too much of our bullshit propaganda.

What you are proposing, however, is to enslave the American population, under China, to keep business as usual going in other countries around the world. Why? Because you blame America for this? The people you would punish would still have had NO SAY WHATSOEVER in economic or international policy. The people who you'd really want to punish would have jumped ship long before.

The greatest good, sacrificing a few for the many is what you're proposing. Guess what? It's unethical.

The Afghanistan war model was flawed from the beginning, as was the reason to go to war in Afghanistan. You don't declare war on Terrorism, then NOT go after the terrorist cells, which probably isn't a feasible long term goal anyway. Al Qaeda pretty much hated the Taliban, and vice versa. The Taliban weren't sheltering Al Qaeda, they're international. Of course, in Afghanistan, NOW the two are working together because they don't have much choice. But this is off topic.

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 3:56 AM

Quote:
No, instead we can chat as much as we liked monitored by your American security services subject to investigation and or arrest if they decide they want to...

I am sure China will expand their internet " freedoms " when their infrastructure allows them the same level of monitoring and control...

This is an exaggeration first of all. Those of us in America smart enough to realize that yes, we are being wiretapped under the Patriot Act and that the government is working with search engines and e-mail services to monitor communication and those who have seen the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement know that the scenario you're describing is where we're HEADED. There was an independent news company who has been subpeona'd to give up private information on their users and who has been subject to server raids. Americans online complain and bitch and moan about it, yes.

But honestly, that's more just selective harrassment and isn't really the norm. Yes, the assholes doing the monitoring are, well, assholes, but look, they couldn't even stop some guy on an ARMY BASE who was supposedly posted about Jihad from shooting the whole shebang up (Assuming it wasn't a set-up, it probably was. Still). These guys are pretty much incompetent and easily outsmarted, their reach is still limited and hard to enforce, and most importantly, you and me? They REALLY don't care. Most likely, you don't even register on their radar. We still have time to reverse the trend of control, and many of us are fighting to do so.

This is also rather optimistic in regards to China. People in power don't tend to give up power.

Quote:
watched a couple Senators last sunday on a program say no jobs have been created by the stimulus money yet, but they think some will come by the beginning of the second quarter next year.... is that good enough ?

It's not a matter of "good enough." It will NEVER be good enough. A job market implies that there must always be unemployment. China's pseudo-communism does in fact have unemployment, manual laborers in the lowest pay grade in the Chinese economy are hired on a day-to-day basis for construction projects or sweatshops or whatever it is they're "applying" for. Not in line early enough? To bad, try to go find somewhere else.

The only way around it is to change the entire system. And the system is unlikely to be changed until it goes it's course and ruins itself. I don't think there's any way to turn it around and preserve what we have, I think always, even when things seem good, I think it's an illusion and we're always on the brink. When we can see through the illusion or it vanishes altogether, maybe we can finally build a system that works.

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 4:09 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
And yet, the moment America starts tanking, everyone is already talking about shifting to other currencies, etc.

Most countries have seen for a while America has been going down the tubes, I expect many of them have contingency plans. The ones who have been planning the furthest ahead would become the new global economy foundation.

The countries most effected would be Europe, but America crashing wouldn't be the end of the world. You've been listening to too much of our bullshit propaganda.

What you are proposing, however, is to enslave the American population, under China, to keep business as usual going in other countries around the world. Why? Because you blame America for this? The people you would punish would still have had NO SAY WHATSOEVER in economic or international policy. The people who you'd really want to punish would have jumped ship long before.

The greatest good, sacrificing a few for the many is what you're proposing. Guess what? It's unethical.

The Afghanistan war model was flawed from the beginning, as was the reason to go to war in Afghanistan. You don't declare war on Terrorism, then NOT go after the terrorist cells, which probably isn't a feasible long term goal anyway. Al Qaeda pretty much hated the Taliban, and vice versa. The Taliban weren't sheltering Al Qaeda, they're international. Of course, in Afghanistan, NOW the two are working together because they don't have much choice. But this is off topic.

sure, countrys are trying to firewall themselves, but do you really believe that if the US defaults on its international debt it wouldn't effect China economy that much ? or Europe ?

what about when everyone else defaults Argentina... Philippines... why shouldn't they ?

The IMF collapses, countries no longer being able to get loans at any price...

As for America... you are a democracy aren't you? In theory you have all had your say in both your economic and foreign policy's... are you saying there is no responsibility ?

Your leaders seem to disagree in all cases except where they might be held accountable...

Ultimately, a people is responsible for the actions and conduct of their country, whether they like it or not, whether it is fair or not...
Just the way it is... want examples, I could cite hundreads

I see no reason why the US should be exempt to this... I would even suggest that if you were not so geographically isolated you would have been held to account a long time ago.

Look at how many wars have been fought over this... The Franco-Mexican War being directly on point

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 4:35 AM

Quote:
As for America... you are a democracy aren't you? In theory you have all had your say in both your economic and foreign policy's... are you saying there is no responsibility ?

No, we're not a democracy. We're a fascist authoritarian state disguised as a republic.

Take our government and government officials, please. And take our corporate executives, who are pulling their strings.

Quote:
sure, countrys are trying to firewall themselves, but do you really believe that if the US defaults on its international debt it wouldn't effect China economy that much ? or Europe ?

Do you still have farms owned by citizens of your country? Any country that has a product they can still export will survive. I'm not saying you won't go through a depression, but you'll recover, and in the process, you might be able to clear out some of your own government corruption. If you look around, I can guarantee wou'll be able to find some.

If the United States deserves to get it's ass kicked for causing a global depression, then fine, you all have good reason to be angry. But honestly, I'd worry more about your own country and the snakes you have there, because I can guarantee you if you're this worried then your government saw this coming and did nothing so they could loot and pillage your treasury as they desire.

And please don't give us to China. That qualifies as cruel and unusual punishment. Just kick our asses and take your pound of flesh. We'd also appreciate it if you didn't occupy us under the name of "stabilizing us" and installing a puppet government, because, again, I point out how well Iraq and Afghanistan have gone. Save your country years of occupation and pointless casualties, and just leave us to our own mess if it comes to that.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 4:47 AM

Joss was right.

The laughing Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 4:47 AM

Joss was right.

The laughing Chrisisall

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 4:50 AM

The video. It was a good satire of how the US preaches its moral values to the world.

As for the rest of it, you all know how I feel about communism, and I won't debate China, but there's a dangerous line here, like the ones around jews, muslims, mexico, etc.

Just, everyone, be careful, don't confuse the communist regime in Beijing with "the chinese" collectively. Most of them would like to see that regime leveled. They also know that to say so is as much as their life is worth.

Of course who here wouldn't like to see the US govt. leveled. Aside from maybe nik and sig. ;)

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:17 AM

True, true. The chinese citizens have a very unfortunate lot, especially the workers.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Of course who here wouldn't like to see the US govt. leveled. Aside from maybe nik and sig.

I just want it cleaned up. Big-time.

The laughing Chrisisall

FREMDFIRMA

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:24 AM

My concern in such a situation is mostly for others.
While in fact as prepared for such unlikely or unfortunate eventualities such as is reasonably possible, I worry for those who are not - and unlike more foolish folk, I'd prefer a thousand allies to a thousand bullets.

I'd say such an action had about Zero (pun intended) chance of success if there's other bright folk out there with similar contingency plans.

But first, let's do our best to try and make sure it never comes to that, eh ?

-Frem
http://code-geass.bandai-ent.com/

KWICKO

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:10 PM

Quote:
No, we're not a democracy. We're a fascist authoritarian state disguised as a republic.

If this is the case, I don't really see why you're arguing against being "stabilized" by China. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

RIVERLOVE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 1:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Of course who here wouldn't like to see the US govt. leveled. Aside from maybe nik and sig.
I just want it cleaned up. Big-time.

The laughing Chrisisall

Don't worry too much Chris as all that you desire will happen soon enough. This Democrat-led Govt. will be thrown out of office next year when they lose both houses of Congress in historic fashion. The only down side for you unfortunately, is that there likely will NOT be room at the table for your Taliban pals. You did say the other day they deserved a seat in the Afghan Govt. didn't you? And who could argue with that bit of wisdom, right Chris? You've missed the beheadings, whippings, rapes, stonings, acid-in-the-face attacks on schoolgirls haven't you? You want to see all that brought back, right Chrisisalltaliban?

ANTHONYT

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:

Don't worry too much Chris as all that you desire will happen soon enough. This Democrat-led Govt. will be thrown out of office next year when they lose both houses of Congress in historic fashion. The only down side for you unfortunately, is that there likely will NOT be room at the table for your Taliban pals. You did say the other day they deserved a seat in the Afghan Govt. didn't you? And who could argue with that bit of wisdom, right Chris? You've missed the beheadings, whippings, rapes, stonings, acid-in-the-face attacks on schoolgirls haven't you? You want to see all that brought back, right Chrisisalltaliban?

Hello,

We'd have to invade a lot of countries and take them over to put a stop to that, River. And then we'd have to live in shame over the atrocities our own people would be causing during the occupation.

No, we do not have the resources to change the world. Only ourselves, and hopefully lead by example.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

KWICKO

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
Don't worry too much Chris as all that you desire will happen soon enough. This Democrat-led Govt. will be thrown out of office next year when they lose both houses of Congress in historic fashion. The only down side for you unfortunately, is that there likely will NOT be room at the table for your Taliban pals. You did say the other day they deserved a seat in the Afghan Govt. didn't you? And who could argue with that bit of wisdom, right Chris? You've missed the beheadings, whippings, rapes, stonings, acid-in-the-face attacks on schoolgirls haven't you? You want to see all that brought back, right Chrisisalltaliban?

Refresh my memory - wasn't it Reagan who supported, armed, and trained the people who became the Taliban and Al Qaeda? Seems you Republicans have more of a love affair with them than anyone else does. As for the torture, rapes, whipping, etc., you guys seem to have done an awful lot of it yourselves over the past eight years, so I'm not real sure where you indignation on this score comes from. And why throw acid in a schoolgirl's face, when it's easier and quicker to just launch a Hellfire missile and take out the whole school?

Besides, if we wipe out all the terrorists, what will you guys run on as a campaign platform? I mean, without fear, what do you offer?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 4:09 PM

Quote:
If this is the case, I don't really see why you're arguing against being "stabilized" by China. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Because one of them is dumb enough to try to be covert about it, which can be taken advantage of. For some reason, the American government still appears to care about public opinion enough to manipulate it, instead of just crushing it to do whatever they want.

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 4:37 PM

I think the argument for letting the Taliban participate in elections is that 1) it gives some legitimacy to the government, a message that reinforces that we're there to help the people of Afghanistan choose who they want to rule them even if it's people we disagree with, and 2) when the Taliban gets absolutely NO votes, we get to laugh at them because they just hung themselves with the rope we offered them. Mwahaha.

KWICKO

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:
If this is the case, I don't really see why you're arguing against being "stabilized" by China. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Because one of them is dumb enough to try to be covert about it, which can be taken advantage of. For some reason, the American government still appears to care about public opinion enough to manipulate it, instead of just crushing it to do whatever they want.

Good point. At least here, we care enough to set up "free speech zones". Even if they are pens made of chain link and razorwire. ;)

KWICKO

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I think the argument for letting the Taliban participate in elections is that 1) it gives some legitimacy to the government, a message that reinforces that we're there to help the people of Afghanistan choose who they want to rule them even if it's people we disagree with, and 2) when the Taliban gets absolutely NO votes, we get to laugh at them because they just hung themselves with the rope we offered them. Mwahaha.

Yuppers. Of course, it will help if they actually DO get no votes, and if it happened in a "clean" election. We apparently don't trust ourselves or our efforts there enough to take that chance. After all, what if the election DIDN'T go our way? (I'm lookin' at YOU, Hamas!)

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:02 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Of course who here wouldn't like to see the US govt. leveled. Aside from maybe nik and sig.
I just want it cleaned up. Big-time.

The laughing Chrisisall

Don't worry too much Chris as all that you desire will happen soon enough. This Democrat-led Govt. will be thrown out of office next year when they lose both houses of Congress in historic fashion. The only down side for you unfortunately, is that there likely will NOT be room at the table for your Taliban pals. You did say the other day they deserved a seat in the Afghan Govt. didn't you? And who could argue with that bit of wisdom, right Chris? You've missed the beheadings, whippings, rapes, stonings, acid-in-the-face attacks on schoolgirls haven't you? You want to see all that brought back, right Chrisisalltaliban?

Yeah, people should listen to Americans to avoid all that...

wait....

New arrest in US gang rape
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10607
189&pnum=1

Forced labour and rape, the new face of slavery in America
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/22/people-trafficking-usa-pro
stitution-ohio

New US rape allegation in Okinawa
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7256056.stm

Fatal skid row shooting believed tied to narcotics dispute
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/11/dispute-over-narcotics-b
elieved-behind-fatal-shooting-on-skid-row.html

Life, death and fear on the L.A. River
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/courts/

Schoolgirl, six, shot dead by classmate
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/661564.stm

or one could go into the actions that occur in countries that have governments propped up by the United States like Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Columbia....

Perhaps your moral rantings would be better served to help those in your own country and the countrys of your friends before you go off on the rest of the world

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I think the argument for letting the Taliban participate in elections is that 1) it gives some legitimacy to the government, a message that reinforces that we're there to help the people of Afghanistan choose who they want to rule them even if it's people we disagree with, and 2) when the Taliban gets absolutely NO votes, we get to laugh at them because they just hung themselves with the rope we offered them. Mwahaha.

Yuppers. Of course, it will help if they actually DO get no votes, and if it happened in a "clean" election. We apparently don't trust ourselves or our efforts there enough to take that chance. After all, what if the election DIDN'T go our way? (I'm lookin' at YOU, Hamas!)

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

An insurgency cannot exist without at least some base level support from the people...

At the rate the insurgency has grown over the past five years, I think that suggest both major dis satisfaction with the present regime ( particular with the election fiasco ) as well as the foreign troops propping that government up ( random airstrikes and drone attacks cannot help )

At this point, if a free election were possible, the Taliban would probably win quite a few protest votes, as Obama won many anybody but the asshole republican votes...

Maybe even win, but the point is lost as we would never see a real free vote anyway...

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

PIRATENEWS

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Refresh my memory - wasn't it Reagan who supported, armed, and trained the people who became the Taliban and Al Qaeda? Seems you Republicans have more of a love affair with them than anyone else does.

Obama's jewish advisor Zbigniew Brezinski founded AllCIAduh, hanging out with USAma Bin Laden in Pakistan (Village Voice 1981 when CIA agent Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro was illegally in Pakistan)

Quote:
"Regret what? That secret operation (the CIA backing of Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorists) was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?"
-Zbigniew Brzezinski, Le Nouvel Observateur, Jan, 1998

"I've learned an immense amount from Dr. Brzezinski."
-Hussein Obama, 12 Sept 2007
youtube.com/watch?v=ASlETEx0T-I

"I endorsed Obama."
-Zbigniew Brzezinski, MSNBC
youtube.com/watch?v=NCO7Pr7RJ7s

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:21 PM

Gino: yeah, also probable. It's kind of too bad that a few years ago, maybe when we first went in, we didn't let the Taliban "compete" in an election when they were extremely unpopular.

PIRATENEWS

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

When say a car company decides to build 300 top end SUVs instead of 3000 base models because the profit margins are higher on the SUVs... and lay off 800 workers in the process... is that really to the benefit of people ?

It freaks me out that Govt Motors still refuses to advertise its Cavalier base model. The smallest car it advertises is the competitor of Honda Accord. Never mind that Honda Civic is the king of the hill in sales. GM runs ads with its entire product line, sans Cavalier, bragging about their gas milage, when Cavalier gets the best mileage for GM.

This decision is made at Bohemian Grove, Bilderburger and CFR, not at GM, to subvert USA for the NWO.

My engineering professors told our class that in 10 years, there would be no more engineering jobs in USA. That was 9 years ago.

Commie China at Billary Clinton Blythe Rockefeller White House: Amerika Destroyed by Design
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4167926428522965274#

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Gino: yeah, also probable. It's kind of too bad that a few years ago, maybe when we first went in, we didn't let the Taliban "compete" in an election when they were extremely unpopular.

How much do you know about how the Taliban came to power Byte ?

In some areas, I think not only would they have won, at any time...

That is the major flaw with trying to push the system of gov that is being pushed

At least with a parliamentary system, everyone gets a voice, and representation. The drawbacks is it is harder to apply outside influence to control such a system, but when you do not marginalize the minority, and you avoid situations where if an area votes for someone who loses the election, there is not retaliation such as withholding aid moneys as is happening now.

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 7:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by piratenews:
Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

When say a car company decides to build 300 top end SUVs instead of 3000 base models because the profit margins are higher on the SUVs... and lay off 800 workers in the process... is that really to the benefit of people ?

It freaks me out that Govt Motors still refuses to advertise its Cavalier base model. The smallest car it advertises is the competitor of Honda Accord. Never mind that Honda Civic is the king of the hill in sales. GM runs ads with its entire product line, sans Cavalier, bragging about their gas milage, when Cavalier gets the best mileage for GM.

This decision is made at Bohemian Grove, Bilderburger and CFR, not at GM, to subvert USA for the NWO.

My engineering professors told our class that in 10 years, there would be no more engineering jobs in USA. That was 9 years ago.

Commie China at Billary Clinton Blythe Rockefeller White House: Amerika Destroyed by Design
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4167926428522965274#

Funny enough I think the direct historical comparison would be 1930's Germany

" In the early 1930s German auto industry was still largely composed of luxury models, and the average German rarely could afford something more than a motorcycle. Seeking a potential new market, some auto industries begun independent projects of a "Volks Auto" (people's automobile) - Mercedes' 170H, Adler's AutoBahn, Steyr 55, Hanomag 1,3L, among others. The trend was not new, as Béla Barényi is credited with having conceived the basic design in the middle 1920's. Joseph Ganz developed the Standard Superior (going as far as advertising it as the "German Volkswagen").[2] Also, in Czechoslovakia, the Hans Ledwinka's penned Tatra 77, a very popular car amongst the German elite, was becoming smaller and more affordable at each revision. In 1933, with many of the above projects still in development or early stages of production, Adolf Hitler declared his intentions for a state-sponsored "Volkswagen" program. Hitler required a basic vehicle capable of transporting two adults and three children at 100 km/h (62 mph). The "People's Car" would be available to citizens of the Third Reich through a savings scheme at 990 Reichsmark, about the price of a small motorcycle (an average income being around 32RM a week).[3]

Despite heavy lobbing in favor of one of the existing projects, Hitler choose to sponsor an all new, state owned factory. The engineer chosen for the task was Ferdinand Porsche. By then an already famed engineer, Porsche was the designer of the Mercedes 170H, and worked at Steyr for quite some time in the late 1920s. When he opened his own design studio he landed two separate "Auto für Jedermann" (car for everybody) projects with NSU and Zündapp, both motorcycle manufacturers. Neither project come to fruition, stalling at prototype phase, but the basic concept remained in Porsche's mind time enough, so on 22 June 1934, Dr. Ferdinand Porsche agreed to create the "People's Car" for Hitler.

Changes included better fuel efficiency, reliability, ease of use, and economically efficient repairs and parts. The intention was that ordinary Europeans would buy the car by means of a savings scheme ("Fünf Mark die Woche musst Du sparen, willst Du im eigenen Wagen fahren" — "Save five Marks a week, if you want to drive your own car"), which around 336,000 people eventually paid into. Volkswagen honoured its savings agreements in West Germany (but not in East Germany) after World War II[citation needed]. Prototypes of the car called the "KdF-Wagen" (German: Kraft durch Freude — "strength through joy"), appeared from 1936 onwards (the first cars had been produced in Stuttgart). The car already had its distinctive round shape and air-cooled, flat-four, rear-mounted engine. The VW car was just one of many KdF programmes which included things such as tours and outings. The prefix Volks— ("People's") was not just applied to cars, but also to other products in Europe; the "Volksempfänger" ra

KWICKO

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 8:01 PM

Quote:
It freaks me out that Govt Motors still refuses to advertise its Cavalier base model. The smallest car it advertises is the competitor of Honda Accord. Never mind that Honda Civic is the king of the hill in sales. GM runs ads with its entire product line, sans Cavalier, bragging about their gas milage, when Cavalier gets the best mileage for GM.

Well, that COULD have to do with the fact that Chevy hasn't sold the Cavalier since 2005. Do most car companies still keep their old, dead models in their new-car lineup ads? If so, it would explain a lot about why they're in such financial dire straits...

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

SIGNYM

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 8:09 PM

Quote:
Of course who here wouldn't like to see the US govt. leveled. Aside from maybe nik and sig.

I'm tempted to say "Fuck you and your little dog too, DT", but seeing as I've sworn off snark I'll refrain. Besides, I like little dogs.

I'm not a lover of this government: neither most peeps who inhabit it, nor the particular form. But there's a difference between saying "I don't like THIS government" and "I don't like ALL government" ... a difference you seem not to have grasped.

If you level government it will be replaced by a type and form not of your own choosing. So if I were to consider leveling government... something I have done quite often on this forum, as you should know... I would like to replace it with specific forms of governnance that are more democratic than now. For example, I have dicussed the problem of a SINGLE LEADER, whether called President, Chair, or CEO. IMHO all workplaces and all governmental functions should be controlled as cooperatives, with no "chair" or "CEO" positions created.

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 8:15 PM

Gino: Bah, Parliaments are Republics just as much as America's congress is. Technically in both the executive branch is SUPPOSED to answer to the legislative branch which is SUPPOSED to answer to the people... They don't.

However, you're right about the problem of the minority vote and exclusion. It's a hard problem to answer for. In the best world, The majority would state what they want, the minority would troubleshoot, and some effort would be made to either address the concerns or compromise.

SIGNYM

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 8:26 PM

Byte: I don't think you understand how a parliamentary system is supposed to work.

OUT2THEBLACK

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 8:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
Of course who here wouldn't like to see the US govt. leveled. Aside from maybe nik and sig.
I'm tempted to say "Fuck you and your little dog too, DT", but seeing as I've sworn off snark I'll refrain. Besides, I like little dogs.

...IMHO all workplaces and all governmental functions should be controlled as cooperatives, with no "chair" or "CEO" positions created.

So , what SignyM is saying is that she only favors 'doggie-style' positions , rather than 'chair' positions...

Because she 'likes' little dogs... as long as they're 'cooperative'. Also , her concept of 'workplace' involves such activities as she does
'on-the-clock' with little dogs...

Plainly then , she IS a government 'employee'...

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 8:49 PM

Quote:
I don't think you understand how a parliamentary system is supposed to work.

Do they elect representatives?

Then they're a Republic.

The ONLY plus involved here is that I haven't heard of any parliamentary systems with the damn stupid electoral college.

But the same problems and potential corruption applies to a parliamentary system as they do to any republic-based system.

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 8:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Gino: Bah, Parliaments are Republics just as much as America's congress is. Technically in both the executive branch is SUPPOSED to answer to the legislative branch which is SUPPOSED to answer to the people... They don't.

However, you're right about the problem of the minority vote and exclusion. It's a hard problem to answer for. In the best world, The majority would state what they want, the minority would troubleshoot, and some effort would be made to either address the concerns or compromise.

Where is the check to Karzai in this system ?

If it was a parliamentary system, the checks are automatic...

The Prime Minister only has marginally more power than any elected member, due to the fact that his/her party controls the majority of seats. In the better systems, ( not mine unfortunately ) you have 6 or 7 partys each representing a different point of view having to find a common consensus before policy can be made. This competition helps to find the middle ground where the people usually live.

If you want to look at what I think is about the best system, I would suggest the Swiss Government, in addition to what I said above they also practice a form of direct democracy in which the public can override government on issues and force deciding referendums. A little ambitious for Afghanistan, but it has tied a country with 4 official languages together with little or no conflicts in their history.

Also with the Taliban... they began as a political force during the post Soviet withdrawl, when warlords and drug merchants controlled their own parts of Afghanistan. These people enslaved everyone, and raped and killed anyone who got in their way, or simply for the hell of it ( picture Somalia )

Mohammed Omar and the Taliban had fought the Soviets... then settled back into their villages. When faced with these warlords, they organized, and fought them driving them into a small pocket ( The Northern Alliance )

Today, the former Northern Alliance make up a large component of the Afghan government, many of these men have committed atrocity's and warcrimes... but they enjoy American support and protection... and have reestablished their drug trade and other activitys

We have a situation with no good guys, but if given an open, free choice... the Pashtun would likely side with the Taliban with the drug warlords being the other choice...

Likely why the president of Afghanistan is known as the mayor of Kabul... without the force of arms he has no real authority.

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

SIGNYM

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:13 PM

O2B
Anger has rendered you incomprehensible.

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:24 PM

Quote:
Where is the check to Karzai in this system ?

If it was a parliamentary system, the checks are automatic...

Ah, you were speaking about Karzai. I think the main problem here is corruption, and I've also heard that some of the vote smudging here is actually a common practice in the Middle East.

Now, I want to be clear: that doesn't make it RIGHT.

But the system us Americans set up in Afghanistan, we set up with the assumption that the people of Afghanistan think the same way Americans do, and behave the same way, same practices and etc., and MORE importantly, we expected the Afghanistan leadership to have the same skill in hiding their transgression as do US politicians. Well, why would the Afghani leadership have needed to? They just have to get into power and then the position is theirs in subsequent elections simply by might makes right. We see this in a number of Middle Eastern leaders, it's by no means an uncommon perspective or tactic regionally.

Heck, voter fraud is practically inevitable WHEREVER you have an election.

The 2005 Afghanistan parliament is fortunately more diverse, so hopefully they'll represent some resistance to Karzai, but only if America stops meddling.

And once again, in the American system, the judicial and legislative are supposed to check the presidential power (and this is also present in the Afghanistan system), unfortunately many of those checks on the executive branch were given up a long time ago.

Quote:
direct democracy in which the public can override government on issues and force deciding referendums.

I like this, but why have the representatives in the first place? If you care enough about an issue, call a town meeting, but otherwise giving people the job of writing laws just means they write themselves crap they can make money off of or or write themselves loopholes. The longer a system of law persists and is added to, the more of a bureaucratic nightmare it becomes.

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:53 PM

River

None of this is a defense of anyone involved. I just want to paint a picture that doesn't even begin to describe how complicated the picture is. It's so complicated not only do I not understand it, but President Obama has just said he doesn't understand it, and then he went and did the amazingly stupid thing I'm about to post as soon as I find the story, but re: the confusion on which terrorist is which:

Be suspicious of everything you read. I'm not sure what's going on in Afghanistan anymore. It seems the US Media calls everything in Afgh "Taliban" and accuses them of chopping off inked fingers, etc.

The israelis did the same thing to hamas.

I'm not apologizing for the terrorists, I'm saying "Do you really know which name the terrorists are going under?"

I mean you have Wahabi and the Northen Alliance and Allah knows how many other factions.

Same story in Israel: we report Hamas did such and such an attack or claimed credit, but did they? Maybe it was Islamic Jihad.

Okay, I get the "so what?" and "why would anyone bother?" But the reality is that the US, Israel, Britain and other world powers, such as China, Russia, India, as well as Muslim powers like Saudia Arabia, Iran, Turkey, Dubai, Pakistan, all have a vested interest in the outcome, and all from time to time make deals and alliances with muslim militias.

Not all Militas are created equal. Some are fried on drugs, strapped up with bombs, and killing everyone in sight. Others are using military, political and diplomatic means to gain power. It would be completely unfair to compare the Mahdi with the Mujahideen, or to compare either with the Janjaweed.

Right now in the Afghan conflict there are 3 million enemy combatants. That's pretty staggering. (Twice the size of the US military.) There are a similar number in Pakistan.

25,000 of those 3,000,000 are Taliban.

At least another 3,000 are Al Qaeda.

I don't have numbers for the Northern Alliance or other militias off the top of my head, but you get how complicated the picture is.

The US Govt. turned against the Taliban in mid 2001 when negotiations broke down. Since then, things have deteriorated, diplomatically. That doesn't mean that we can have any certainty what the Taliban, per se, has to do with anything to do with the US. We throw around the term "Taliban in Pakistan" with very little accuracy, just as we threw around the term "Enemy."

Essetially, we're doing exactly what Israel is doing, which is what wartime powers always do: Blame every evil on your own personally enemy.

Reality is that the Taliban are quite popular, and liable to end up in power when the Karzai govt. collapses, and they hate the US, and want no part of a US pressence in the muslim world, and we would find ourselves "Uninvited" and our govt. very much doesn't want that.

This is a similar position to the position of Israel: Hamas is pretty dead set on a Palestinian State, but willing to recognizing Israel in exchange. By contrast, Islamic Jihad would stop at nothing to see Israel destroyed, IIRC. So logically, Israel would oppose Islamic Jihad more, right? Well, then there's the matter of pratical reality: There's a lot of support for Hamas, and they might succeed, and Israel really doesn't want that. Islamic Jihad is far more Pie in the Sky and will never ever get what it wants. So regardless of intentions, Hamas is a far greater threat, which is why Israel was blaming Hamas for everything even before they came to power: Because they knew they were a threat.

PIRATENEWS

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

Gino: Bah, Parliaments are Republics just as much as America's congress is. Technically in both the executive branch is SUPPOSED to answer to the legislative branch which is SUPPOSED to answer to the people... They don't.

Neither branch actually reads nor writes the laws they pass, nor could they understand the law if they tried to read it. Judicial branch also ignores the law in 99.99% of cases. All fed govt is run on borrowed money. None of the income tax funds govt, all tax revenue is exported to foreign banksters.

That's the democracy we're spreading by genocide.

BTW, dictionaries define the word congress as sexual intercourse. Which explains lobbying perfectly.

OUT2THEBLACK

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
O2B
Anger has rendered you incomprehensible.

Sorry to hear that your madness has rendered you so uncomprehending , then...

But , you've always been angry , so this end result was pretty much inevitable .

Get some help . Really .

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:
Where is the check to Karzai in this system ?

If it was a parliamentary system, the checks are automatic...

Ah, you were speaking about Karzai. I think the main problem here is corruption, and I've also heard that some of the vote smudging here is actually a common practice in the Middle East.

Now, I want to be clear: that doesn't make it RIGHT.

But the system us Americans set up in Afghanistan, we set up with the assumption that the people of Afghanistan think the same way Americans do, and behave the same way, same practices and etc., and MORE importantly, we expected the Afghanistan leadership to have the same skill in hiding their transgression as do US politicians. Well, why would the Afghani leadership have needed to? They just have to get into power and then the position is theirs in subsequent elections simply by might makes right. We see this in a number of Middle Eastern leaders, it's by no means an uncommon perspective or tactic regionally.

Heck, voter fraud is practically inevitable WHEREVER you have an election.

The 2005 Afghanistan parliament is fortunately more diverse, so hopefully they'll represent some resistance to Karzai, but only if America stops meddling.

And once again, in the American system, the judicial and legislative are supposed to check the presidential power (and this is also present in the Afghanistan system), unfortunately many of those checks on the executive branch were given up a long time ago.

Quote:
direct democracy in which the public can override government on issues and force deciding referendums.

I like this, but why have the representatives in the first place? If you care enough about an issue, call a town meeting, but otherwise giving people the job of writing laws just means they write themselves crap they can make money off of or or write themselves loopholes. The longer a system of law persists and is added to, the more of a bureaucratic nightmare it becomes.

When the US went into Afghanistan there was alot of talk about the experience the US had with nation building and the example of Japan was used to great effect by people who, in my opinion never looked at what Douglas MacArthur did to set up the post war government in Japan or why he did it... several great books on this are out there, I could recommended one if your interested.

It looks to me like any lesson to be learned from that example was thrown out the window, and a disimilar copy of the disfunctional American system was emplaced... and now that mistake more than anything else will cost the US, NATO, and the Afghanis themselves, because the US will not abandon this mistake, nor will or should the Afghanis accept it.

As for the direct democracy, I believe first you need to register a petition with a clear question, then gather a set number of signatures ( repersents I think 2% of the pop where 1 sig repersents 100 people ) well something like that, a statistical formula within a set time frame.

It doesn't happen often, but it is the ultimate check on political power, and people there I think tend to be more informed on the issues rather than simply vote onlong party lines and live with it. They elect folk to do a job, but can still have their say when that gov goes off the rails.... not at an election 3 years later or having to compromise your dislike on one issue to keep a guy in to do something else on two other issues you like.

http://direct-democracy.geschichte-schweiz.ch/

Also they do frequent referendums on contentious issues, or where they find there might be deadlocked, imagine with your present healthcare debates... I think your townhalls are really a joke, circuses where some semi informed lunatics scream and rant...

What if during your next civil election you also marked your ballot to decide whether the government should pursue a public option...

A simple question, no lobbists bribing, no party ideology, no talking heads screaming... just establish a mandate, then write

KWICKO

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 12:03 AM

Quote:

This is a similar position to the position of Israel: Hamas is pretty dead set on a Palestinian State, but willing to recognizing Israel in exchange. By contrast, Islamic Jihad would stop at nothing to see Israel destroyed, IIRC. So logically, Israel would oppose Islamic Jihad more, right? Well, then there's the matter of pratical reality: There's a lot of support for Hamas, and they might succeed, and Israel really doesn't want that. Islamic Jihad is far more Pie in the Sky and will never ever get what it wants. So regardless of intentions, Hamas is a far greater threat, which is why Israel was blaming Hamas for everything even before they came to power: Because they knew they were a threat.

Good analogy.

I notice we tend to blame an awful lot of stuff on "Al Qaeda In Iraq", too, which is ironic, since there never was such an entity until AFTER we invaded Iraq in an effort to "stabilize" it. :) Now it seems AQI are just EVERYWHERE over there. So one has to conclude one of two things: Either we're exaggerating their presence (making shit up, go figure), or we've given them the best recruiting tool since Pearl Harbor.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

PIRATENEWS

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 10:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:

This is a similar position to the position of Israel: Hamas is pretty dead set on a Palestinian State, but willing to recognizing Israel in exchange.

I notice we tend to blame an awful lot of stuff on "Al Qaeda In Iraq", too, which is ironic, since there never was such an entity until AFTER we invaded Iraq in an effort to "stabilize" it. :) Now it seems AQI are just EVERYWHERE over there. So one has to conclude one of two things: Either we're exaggerating their presence (making shit up, go figure), or we've given them the best recruiting tool since Pearl Harbor.

Hamas Was Founded by Mossad
www.wariscrime.com/2008/12/29/news/hamas-was-founded-by-mossad/

Quote:
"'Al-Qaida', literally "THE DATABASE", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the (Jewish/Atheist Communist) Russians."
-Robin Cook, London Guardian, "Former Blair Minister Points Out Al-Qaeda CIA Ties," July 9, 2005 (assassinated while walking)

"'Al Qaeda' is NOT an organization. Al Qaeda is a way of working ... but this has the hallmark of that approach."
-Queen Tony BLiar, Fox News, "Cops: London Attacks Were Homicide Blasts," July 15, 2005

Terrorism.
The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized;
a mode of government by terror or intimidation.
-Webster Dictionary, 1913

The Greatest Movie Ever Made

PIRATENEWS

Wednesday, November 25, 2009 10:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:
Where is the check to Karzai in this system ?

If it was a parliamentary system, the checks are automatic...

Ah, you were speaking about Karzai. I think the main problem here is corruption, and I've also heard that some of the vote smudging here is actually a common practice in the Middle East.

Now, I want to be clear: that doesn't make it RIGHT.

But the system us Americans set up in Afghanistan...

Heroin production up 12,000% after US/UK invasion... MISSION ACCOMPLICED!

DREAMTROVE

Thursday, November 26, 2009 2:17 AM

Quote:
Pirate News:
Neither branch actually reads nor writes the laws they pass, nor could they understand the law if they tried to read it.

John, you really nailed it on the head. I'd go so far as to say that they are actively selected for that inability.

ETA: Mike,

The Al Qaeda thing is all about labelling. We need to identify an enemy not actually harm us, and then call anything we hit that enemy.

PIRATENEWS

Thursday, November 26, 2009 2:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Quote:
Pirate News:
Neither branch actually reads nor writes the laws they pass, nor could they understand the law if they tried to read it.

John, you really nailed it on the head. I'd go so far as to say that they are actively selected for that inability.

A skilled lawyer or pro se ought to be able to argue in court that such laws are void, due to lack of representation or fraud.

Funny thing is, 75% of judges in USA are NOT licensed lawyers, never passed a bar exam, never attended law college, and many cannot even read, according to NY Times.
http://piratenews-tv.blogspot.com/2009/03/constitutional-right-to-trav
el-without.html

Politicians (including judges) seem more interested in booze, drugs, bribes and whores, than actually showing up for work.

Most legislation appears to be passed when 90% of legislators are not present, with politicians making multiple votes per person, caught on video:

The "Federal" Reserve Bank Act was "passed" during Christmas vacation in Congress, at midnight, with only 3 Congresscrooks actually voting on it. That's got FRAUD written all over it, that reuslted in ALL fed income taxes paid to private foregn bankers, with NONE of income taxes used to actually run the govt. ALL fed govt operations are run by borrowed money, 25% is loaned from Communist China.
www.freedomtofascism.com (documentary by a good jew, founder of Libertarian and Constitution Parties)