MtnGoat
-
Posts
739 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by MtnGoat
-
-
"This notion that every nation in the world must fall in line with the U.S. for to dissent is to risk losing the carrot or face being beat with a big stick."
If this is "just what" you've been talking about, then I must have missed something. Nowhere did I say any nation receiving aid should be beaten with a stick for non support, only that they lose the carrot. Their non support is fully their choice and I have no problem with that.
However, if they expect freebies paid for by US to continue coming while they do not aid us in return, there's nothing unreasonable at all about cutting them off.
"There's no effort to understand other positions or to concede that the dissenters may be right sometimes. "
I don't agree. It seems to me a heck of a lot of people confuse agreement with someone, for "understanding", for one thing. I fully understand the reasons some people have for supporting the ICC, but I still oppose it. I can understand positions I don't agree with all day long, and yet still not agree or want to sign on.
-
"Why then, do we adopt the double standards to this argument as evidenced by the US withdrawing military aid from 50 nations today because they dared to say that they supported an International Court that would not exempt illegal acts by Americans?"
What's the problem? Why should we support nations that do not support our postion on the ICC, especially with military aid which could be used to blame us in the ICC in cases involving operations using our aid?
If they get our cash, then they should expect to play by our rules, or lose it. I can't for the life of me figure out why anyone should expect to continue to get cash while refusing to back our position. If they want to do what they want, they can do so, but without the cash. It's their choice.
-
"try 1) using a disproportionate amount of world resources and"
When did it become evident that there is some standard of "proportionate" use of resources that meant anything at all?
Besides, if we increase the "proportionality" by increasing their standard of living instead of decreasing ours, then the usual suspects will just switch to bitching about using "too many" resources overall, another sign of the zero sum economics bugaboo.
Part of the problem not mentioned in this entire thread is that most of the world is infested/infected with the false idea that economics is somehow a zero sum process.
"2)having a military presence in 120 nations for more salient sources of resentment. "
Yeah, everyone's all upset about the mean 'ol US around until they want something done, then it's us that gets to do the heavy lifting.
As for an earlier poster listing various and sundry treaties we refuse to sign, most of these instances have to do with lousy treaties based on crappy ideas, or with poorly constituted wording for what could be a decent idea. Kyoto and the ICC are the former, the bioweapon treaty one of the latter.
As far as I remember we are not obligated to sign lousy treaties, no matter who else signs them or what lofty titles they carry.
-
"If you are the yardstick, then it's little wonder they are duped because you're a fucking senseless imbecile."
Yet one who manages to get by just fine without assuming everyone else is an idiot.
-
So it's just all those darned voters who are stupid, eh? Quite a worldview to think this of so many people one doesn't know.
-
"I think any student from tardblog.com would be a formidable enough opponent for GW. "
I think the Dems should consider this candidate pool for both legislative and presidential elections, given their continual drubbing by dumb 'ol Dubya. If you can't outwit the guy you claim is so dumb, where does that leave you?
-
Let's not forget the other factor in the free flow of Nutella to the US, the free flow of Nutella, at free market prices!
-
"The marijuana available today is stronger than the marijuana available in the 1960s."
Horrors!
"It also may be laced with other drugs."
This is why, like anything else, it's important to know where what you're buying comes from.
"Because it's impossible to judge its potency just by looking at it, its effects are hard for users to regulate."
It's not like you're going to OD on it. You may wind up eating an entire pizza however.
"Tetrahydrocannabinol, the main, active ingredient in marijuana, temporarily alters brain functioning that affects sensory perception, reflexes, and coordination. "
That's what makes it fun.
"Because it changes the way people see, hear, and feel, it can impair judgement. "
Since you know this at the outset, that's why you use your judgement in deciding wether to smoke any or not. Just like drinking.
"As with any excessive drug use, smoking marijuana can interfere with work performance, extra-curricular activities, and peer relations. Heavy smokers often lose their sense of motivation and find it difficult to concentrate. Particularly potent marijuana can even induce paranoia. "
Like anything else in life, the real message here is don't overdo it.
"Studies also show that someone who smokes five joints a day may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a full pack of cigarettes every day."
If'n yer smokin five joints a day, day in day out, you've already got other problems.
The bottom line IMO is that it's good to have info so folks can make choices they are comfortable with, but beyond that, continuing with the prohibition on doobage is a waste of time and energy.
-
CORE blasts lethal Greenpeace policies
Censures radical groups Run for Death in NY-NJ parks
New York City (May 8, 2003) Greenpeace radicals are used to writing the script and having the stage to themselves, when they protest Shell Oil or the World Bank. Today, however, soon they will be the target of a vocal, colorful protest organized by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE).
Saturday, May 10th, the green radicals will come to New Jersey's Liberty State Park to recruit members, raise money and frighten people half to death about chemical facilities in New Jersey and New York. The CORE protesters intend to counter them by dramatizing how Greenpeace policies bring misery, disease and death to millions of people in developing countries, particularly in Africa.
Greenpeace intends a 1K walk and 5K Run for Your Life road race to promote its agenda. Calling the event a Run for Death, CORE will send over one hundred protesters in African folk garb and grim reaper costumes carrying little coffins, beating drums and waving placards. Their goal will be to underscore the millions of Africans who perish every year because Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and other radical groups oppose pesticide spraying to control malaria, biotechnology to ease malnutrition, and electrical generating plants to power hospitals and water treatment plants.
Placards carried by CORE demonstrators will read: Africans want better lives, Stop the eco-manslaughter, DDT saves African lives, and Well-fed Greens Starving Africans.
"Greenpeace is part of an international network of socialist, anti-development organizations located in all the capitals of the developed world and most developing nations" said Niger Innis, National Spokesperson for CORE. "To serve its own ideological agenda, it wants to keep the Third World permanently mired in Third World poverty, disease and death. So far it has succeeded. We are here to tell these radicals that we arent going to stand for this anymore. And neither are the poor people of Africa, Asia and Latin America.
"Greenpeace claims it is for the people" Innis noted. "In reality, it is a powerful elite of First World activist whose hardcore agenda puts people last. It's time to hold these zealots accountable for the misery and death they cause."
Worldwide, 2 billion people still have no electrical power, no lights, no refrigeration, no clean drinking water. Instead, women and children squat in mud and wet cow dung, to collect manure for fuel. Millions die every year from lung diseases caused by indoor air pollution from these cooking fires, or diarrhea due to contaminated food and drinking water.
Nuclear, hydroelectric and fossil fuel plants could help solve these problems and provide electricity and hope for schools, hospitals, businesses, industries and communities. But green radicals oppose all these projects, and tell these destitute people they should be happy with little solar panels on their huts. Now and for generations to come.
Across Africa, malaria kills 2 million people every year, half of them children. Over 250 million more get this horrible disease and are unable to work for weeks or months on end, costing their countries $12 billion annually. Malaria also threatens Asia and Latin America.
DDT and other pesticides, used in tiny amounts, can slash malaria rates and deaths by 80% or more. But Greenpeace absolutely opposes this and pressures the European Union to ban fish and agricultural exports (including tobacco!) from any African nation that uses DDT. Even the liberal New York Times says wealthy nations should be helping poor countries with all available means including DDT. But the callous eco-radicals refuse to budge.
In southern Africa, 14 million people are starving. Desperate to survive another day, they hunt down and cook anything that swims, runs, crawls or flies. Biotechnology could save lives and preserve wildlife and habitats, by enabling farmers to grow more food on less land.
But well-fed eco-fanatics shriek Frankenfoods and genetic pollution. They threaten sanctions on nations that dare to grow genetically modified crops, to feed their people or replace crops that have been wiped out by insects and blights. They plan to spend $175 million battling biotech foods over the next five years. Not one dime of this will go to the starving poor, and even Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore is disgusted that the organization he once led puts unfounded fear-mongering ahead of the world's poor. But the zealots are unmoved.
Other chemicals are just as important as pesticides for saving lives. Without chlorine, for example, water purification becomes almost impossible. But radical greens are also trying to eliminate chlorine and pressure developing countries not to use it. In 1991, they managed to persuade Peruvian authorities to stop chlorinating the nations drinking water, Innis pointed out, and a cholera epidemic infected half a million people and killed 4,700. The radicals priorities are completely upside down. And now they want to impose the same lethal policies here in the United States.
" The carnage has got to end"Innis said. People should be ashamed to support these fanatics and the eco-manslaughter they are perpetrating on the worlds most destitute people. Todays protest is just the first step in bringing justice to the Third World
www.core-online.org/news/release_4.htm
-
"Fascism - noun - A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism. "
That's odd, considering the govts historically known as as Fascist, such as Germany's Nazi's and Mussolini's govt, as well as N Korea and others, are all socialist.
The definition provided by the poster provides the proof of fasicms being a form socialism, but the author of the definition was too inept to realize it. When you merge state with buisness ownership, you don't get a right wing govt, you get socialism by definition.
-
"The tax cut that just got passed is all for rich people."
Yeah, if you consider rich people those who actually pay taxes. This will save me a good grand or more, and I'm hardly rich.
"Dems have never made a big deal about states rights."
Of course they don't! If they did that, they'd have to recognize some limit to their megalomania and basic instinct to butt into everyone elses buisness.
-
sounds to me the useless bitch that belongs in that sack is the screwhead too ignorant to get their cat neutered.
-
hardly, j_w, it's human rights charter and it's contents, make it a socialist organization.
When you believe people have "postive" rights specifically entitling them to the labor and resources of other people, and that the state, not private ownership, should direct production and specify distribution, via state coercion, you are a socialist. Support that all you like, buts lets at least be honest about their ideology.
-
I prefer the caustic sterile treatment when dealing with individuals, because as actual person's responding they deserve some measure of respect IMO. Attacking worthless screwheads like the UN is a totally different matter. Few institutions so riddled with pointless beaurocracy ( a singular hallmark of a socialist entity) can boast such an incredible record of ineffectiveness and failed ideas. From Libya chairing the council on Human rights, to Iraq's coming turn to chair the disarmament committee, to the knowingly permitting Saddam to soak up oil for food money, it just gets better and better. The UN should be dissolved.
-
What a shock. The toothless numbnuts at the UN know full well Saddam and Co is stealing from the UN approved Oil for Food program and just keeps mum. Then they stay mum while the usual suspects complain about sanctions harming Iraq, while in possession of knowledge of just where the money is actually going.
Sounds about par for the course. Everyone interviewed in that article basically says "not my job" and "gee, isn't it too bad". Hadn't they ever heard of telling someone outside of the UN about it and making a stink? Or is the UN's non existent reputation for "effectiveness" preventing them from doing what beaurocrats everywhere dread... actually taking action?
-
-
"It's not the government's role to tell us what our culture is. The government should reflect the culture, not the other way around."
Good to see at least a few people have it right.
-
Ghostbusters:
Test Subject: What are you trying to prove here anyway?
Dr. Peter Venkman: I'm studying the effects of negative reinforcement on E.S.P ability
Test subject: The effect? I'll tell you what the effect is, it's pissing me off!
*****
Dr. Peter Venkman: Back off, man. I'm a scientist.
******
Janine Melnitz: Do you have any hobbies?
Dr. Egon Spengler: I collect spores, molds, and fungus.
Janine Melnitz: That's very fascinating. I like to read a lot myself.
Dr. Egon Spengler: Print is dead.
*********
Dr. Peter Venkman: Egon, this reminds me of that time you tried to drill a hole in your head.
Dr. Egon Spengler: That would have worked if you hadn't stopped me.
-
Burt Rutan is known for brilliant aeronautical research, unconventional designs, and getting results on special projects. His company, Scaled Composites, designed and built the Voyager, which went around the world nonstop on one fueling, along with many other high efficiency designs.
Yesterday Rutan unveiled SC's ongoing private space program and intent to sieze the the X Prize, an award of $10 Mill to the first private, non govt entity to launch civilians into space (defined as 100km high, or 62 miles) and return them safely to earth, a task which must be done twice in 10 days to win.
Rutan's unconventional take on this project includes an airborne launch from a mother ship, and a tiny suborbital aircraft powered by a rocket engine burning liquid rubber oxidized by nitrous. Re entry will be accomplished by feathering large tailsurfaces to achieve an extreme nose up attitude for the craft in order to increase surface drag and keep the temperatures low enough to escape using heat tiles on the hull.
Check it all out at:
www.scaled.com/projects/t.../index.htm
Way cool. With Rutan in the race, I'll bet the other competitors are sweating it!
-
"you have been told repeatedly that 98% (or wahtever overwhelming percentage) of SUVs are not used for off-roading, ......"
Great. Not one of these issues means anybody deserves some self issued enforcer placing crap on their vehicle.
Neither does one of these issues, or even all of them combined, mean these folks don't have the right to drive what they please, or that they aren't aware of these issues when they *still* choose to own one, to the consternation of others who feel the only valid choice is what they value for their own reasons.
"i don't have to demonstrate to you that the laws of probability indicate that said suit is most likely not going to need commuting in a tank for after work pursuits. "
and yet when it comes to policing behavior, some folks here are entirely ready to put stickers on his vehicle without actually *knowing* that person, which is the problem. Making observations about odds is one thing, taking to task actual individuals you pick out, and you know nothing about, because of said odds, is ludicrous.
"instead of admitting that driving a SUV for mondane tasks is very wasteful."
Why should I admit it? Waste is not the same thing to everyone. I find riding a jet wasteful. I think driving to the mountains for selfish reasons of personal pleasure could be considered wasteful. *ANYTHING* not needed for the extreme basics of hand to mouth existence can be considered wasteful. But no, folks want what they want not to be wasteful and if someone else chooses differently, by golly look at those bastards. How dare they.
The whole idea of liberty is deciding for yourself what you value and pursuing it, not being beholden to a bunch of self appointed nannies and ascetics intent on judging everyone around them and appointing taxes, payments, judgement, and punishment for the sins of not worshipping at the altar of your particular worldview.
It seems the folks most concered about "choice" and "diversity" only apply these ideals on the most superficial areas imaginable, generally where they *already* agree with someone.
"and you wonder why joshk and others are done debating?"
I already know why. The same folks concerned about being "open minded" can't handle more than a soundbite of response on the most simple ideas possible, especially when you dare disagree. I see plenty of folks, posting plenty of long responses, and yet the most intense complaining occurs when it's not the liberal line being followed.
-
that serves the same purpose Josh, congrats. must be something to be part of a movement so adept at dealing with dissenting ideas on such a high level.
-
yes, nice response from an "open mind". Actually challenge their cherished views and instead of dealing with it, they see blah blah blah. What a sign of "enlightenment". Maybe you ought to cover your eyes and repeat "I can't read you".
-
-
Since you can't defend your own positions with any relevance, why bother reading them?
Here we have a person who figures they know all they need to know about individuals based on the car they see them in, who applies their selfish version of holier than thou enviro judgementalism without actually knowing the folks he's judging.....and gee, he doesn't want to read someone who calls him on it. After all, he knows he's right, because "cares" enough to vandalize people's cars....when they're not looking. Wow, what commitment. The other fellow tells us over and over how much more gas should cost..... as long as he can make it cost that for everyone. After all, his morals don't count, if he can't make everyone else do the same. That's some kinda system of personal belief. Carry on, you caring folk!
Why Do People Hate America?
in Spray
Posted
"of course, we are entitled driving to the corner store to pick up a six pack while others don't have basic amenities."
Yes, we are.
Depending on where you are talking about, their lack of amenities probably has more to do with their living in some form of a socialist nation which does not recognize private property, right to self ownership, or any other number of things more than it means they don't have a coat because I went to get a beer.
" it's our due, we are the chosen people."
I'd never say we are the "chosen" people, but if that's how you see the world that's your buisness.
"Actually, fairness is not even part of our language."
Depending on how you define it, I'm not sure it's part of yours. What's "fair" about you spending money to be on the internet when those folks you're so concerned about don't have the basic amenities? If we're using things disproportionately, doesn't that include you, j_b?
"personally i find the 'fine' company we keep in not signing said treaties much more telling .... (i.e. every single rogue nation we spend so much time declaring evil) "
Whatever. I know your predilection for judging people by groups, so I understand this. Not being a believer in group identity, or assigning guilt by association, I don't have this problem.
I don't think people are Nazi's because they drink water and Hitler drank water, I don't think that because some drug dealers use banks that all bank users are drug dealers, and I don't care why Iran or whoever won't sign whatever treaty. Why they will or won't is their concern, not yours and certainly not ours. If you're more interested in counting heads and deciding what is just not by content but by association, that's your problem. I'll stick with going by content regardless of who does what else for what other reasons.