Are You Proud To Be An American? Tee Shirts
Roedy Green
they are proud of the atrocities and tortures Bush has ordered in
Iraq.
I thought of a way to test them.
Offer Tee shirts, in heavy duty cotton for only $1 including shipping
in 4 sizes.
On them it says:
I am proud to be an American
and on the flip side
I support the troops in Iraq.
On the front in a selected photo or artistic rendition by a famous
porn artist of one of the atrocities. see
http://mindprod.com/iraq.html#ATROCITIES
On the back is one of the tortures or sexual abuses.
See how many takers you get.
Bush has kiddie rape porn videos made at Abu Ghraib.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040717-082858-3675r.htm
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
See http://mindprod.com/iraq.html photos of Bush's war crimes
Seawolf
"Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:9vhuu0dr305igre13...@4ax.com...
> Something does not quite ring true to me the way Republicans pretend
> they are proud of the atrocities and tortures Bush has ordered in
> Iraq.
And you have proof that these "atrocites and tortures" have been ordered by
Bush of course.........
>
> I thought of a way to test them.
>
> Offer Tee shirts, in heavy duty cotton for only $1 including shipping
> in 4 sizes.
Is that $1 American?
>
> On them it says:
>
> I am proud to be an American
>
> and on the flip side
>
> I support the troops in Iraq.
I'd pay more than $1 American for a shirt that said that......Damn Roedy you
could make a million Canadian of that idea!!!!
>
>
> On the front in a selected photo or artistic rendition by a famous
> porn artist of one of the atrocities.
You talking about the arab "freedom fighter" sawing off the head of an
innocent civillian??????
Brent
Seawolf
AMERICAN!!!! SORRY YOU AREN'T!!!!
"Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:9vhuu0dr305igre13...@4ax.com...
hughb...@yesiree.ca
On 19-Jan-2005, Roedy Green <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
> I am proud to be an American
>
> and on the flip side
>
> I support the troops in Iraq.
>
>
> On the front in a selected photo or artistic rendition by a famous
> porn artist of one of the atrocities. see
> http://mindprod.com/iraq.html#ATROCITIES
>
> On the back is one of the tortures or sexual abuses.
>
> See how many takers you get.
How about a t-shirt that says: "Proud to support the U.N."
on the back you could put pictures of a mountain of corpses in Rwanda, or
burned out villages in Sudan, or stills from those nasty porno tapes shot by
peacekeepers in the Congo, or the grisly scene on a Tel Aviv street corner
moments after a suicide bombing... Yeah, that would be cool. Y'know, those
U.N. guys make the Americans look like total pansies.
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>And you have proof that these "atrocites and tortures" have been ordered by
>Bush of course.........
I don't, but Seymour Hersh does.
Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib
Seymour M. Hersh
Amazon
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060195916/canadianmindprod
http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060195916/canadianmindp-20
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060195916/canadianmindp-21
http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060195916/canadianmin0b-21
Barnes & Noble
http://service.bfast.com/bfast/click?bfmid=2181&sourceid=39378888&bfpid=0060195916&bfmtype=book
Chapters Indigo (Canada)
http://chapters.indigo.ca/Affiliates/ItemPage.asp?PRODUCTTYPE=1&AFFID=109369&ISBN=0060195916
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>BTW, regardless of your socialist rants....YES!! I AM PROUD TO BE AN
>AMERICAN!!!! SORRY YOU AREN'T!!!!
Would you wear such a shirt?
Roedy Green
quoted :
>on the back you could put pictures of a mountain of corpses in Rwanda,
I don't think you understand how the UN works. The U.N. did nothing
about Rwanda because the _USA_ vetoed action.
The problem is the UN does not have enough power to reign in the
members of the security council, each of whom has a veto.
What we need is a MORE powerful UN where security council members too
have to submit to rule of law.
Further, strictly speaking the UN had no right to intervene in Rwanda.
It is allowed to meddle only in affairs BETWEEN countries.
Again, we need a STRONGER UN that enforces basic human rights INSIDE
countries too.
Seawolf
"Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:08:06 GMT, "Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com>
> wrote or quoted :
>
>>And you have proof that these "atrocites and tortures" have been ordered
>>by
>>Bush of course.........
>
> I don't, but Seymour Hersh does.
Ahh, yes. Forcing Abu Gahrab prisoners to stand naked in front of women is
totaly on par with masked terrorists cutting of the heads of
civillians............
Try again Roedy....
Brent
Seawolf
"Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:11:33 GMT, "Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com>
> wrote or quoted :
>
>>BTW, regardless of your socialist rants....YES!! I AM PROUD TO BE AN
>>AMERICAN!!!! SORRY YOU AREN'T!!!!
>
> Would you wear such a shirt?
I would wear a shirt that says "Proud to be an American"
>
> Bush has kiddie rape porn videos made at Abu Ghraib.
This accusasion has no basis in reality.....
Seawolf
"Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
Seawolf
"Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:j2luu05d5rur1smfs...@4ax.com...
> quoted :
>
>>on the back you could put pictures of a mountain of corpses in Rwanda,
>
> I don't think you understand how the UN works. The U.N. did nothing
> about Rwanda because the _USA_ vetoed action.
Lie
>
> The problem is the UN does not have enough power to reign in the
> members of the security council, each of whom has a veto.
So true....we should le Khofi run the world! He can't even controll what
his own son does!!
>
> What we need is a MORE powerful UN where security council members too
> have to submit to rule of law.
Who's law? What may be leagal in one country, may not be legal in another
county......
>
> Further, strictly speaking the UN had no right to intervene in Rwanda.
> It is allowed to meddle only in affairs BETWEEN countries.
Nice way of saying, it's not the UN's fault.......
Homer Sampson
"Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:CMIHd.8144$K72.1...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
> "Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:k0luu0pod13lul0n8...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:08:06 GMT, "Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com>
>> wrote or quoted :
>>
>>>And you have proof that these "atrocites and tortures" have been ordered
>>>by
>>>Bush of course.........
>>
>> I don't, but Seymour Hersh does.
>
> Ahh, yes. Forcing Abu Gahrab prisoners to stand naked in front of women
> is totaly on par with masked terrorists cutting of the heads of
> civillians............
What part of "Reporter alleges sodomy at Abu Ghraib" are you unable to
understand?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040717-082858-3675r.htm
Homer Sampson
information in. Well, you can exchange words, but they will not listen. The
UN is evil because they've been told it's evil. The US is good because
they've been told patriotism is about unquestioning loyalty, not that
patriotism is utterly about making your government accountable. Bush is a
Christian because he opposes abortion and says God every chance he gets,
even though he's about as close to acting like Christ as 0 is to infinity.
No amount of reality gets through their filter if it contradicts what they
want to believe.
"Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true."
--Francis Bacon
"Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:j2luu05d5rur1smfs...@4ax.com...
Seawolf
"Homer Sampson" <m...@me.com> wrote in message
news:e6WdnRYAmcq...@comcast.com...
>
> "Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:CMIHd.8144$K72.1...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>>
>> "Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:k0luu0pod13lul0n8...@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:08:06 GMT, "Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com>
>>> wrote or quoted :
>>>
>>>>And you have proof that these "atrocites and tortures" have been ordered
>>>>by
>>>>Bush of course.........
>>>
>>> I don't, but Seymour Hersh does.
>>
>> Ahh, yes. Forcing Abu Gahrab prisoners to stand naked in front of women
>> is totaly on par with masked terrorists cutting of the heads of
>> civillians............
>
> What part of "Reporter alleges sodomy at Abu Ghraib" are you unable to
> understand?
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040717-082858-3675r.htm
The whole part of how an allegation becomes fact without proof on these
NGs....
Any other questions?
Brent
Homer Sampson
>
> "Homer Sampson" <m...@me.com> wrote in message
> news:e6WdnRYAmcq...@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:CMIHd.8144$K72.1...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>>>
>>> "Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:k0luu0pod13lul0n8...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:08:06 GMT, "Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com>
>>>> wrote or quoted :
>>>>
>>>>>And you have proof that these "atrocites and tortures" have been
>>>>>ordered by
>>>>>Bush of course.........
>>>>
>>>> I don't, but Seymour Hersh does.
>>>
>>> Ahh, yes. Forcing Abu Gahrab prisoners to stand naked in front of women
>>> is totaly on par with masked terrorists cutting of the heads of
>>> civillians............
>>
>> What part of "Reporter alleges sodomy at Abu Ghraib" are you unable to
>> understand?
>> http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040717-082858-3675r.htm
>
> The whole part of how an allegation becomes fact without proof on these
> NGs....
>
> Any other questions?
>
> Brent
Yeah.
(1) Why you are talking about it being prisoners being paraded naked vs.
beheadings, when the thread was about murder and rape of Iraqis. The whole
point is that it's much more than prisoners being paraded around naked.
(2) Why you think an allegation by someone as respected and vindicated as
Seymour Hersh doesn't merit more than being just a statement that you seem
to blithely disregard, not as if it wasn't a proven fact, but as if it was
completely meritless and false.
Seawolf
Because the lefties want to equate what happened at Abu Gharib with what is
happening to civillians in Iraq......
The whole
> point is that it's much more than prisoners being paraded around naked
Really? What is the point then? I would love to hear it.........
>
> (2) Why you think an allegation by someone as respected and vindicated as
> Seymour Hersh doesn't merit more than being just a statement that you seem
> to blithely disregard,
Because it is just an allegation! How hard is that for you to understand?
not as if it wasn't a proven fact, but as if it was
> completely meritless and false.
Is it a proven fact? No, it's not! When it is proven, then I will address
it, otherwise, it's just more BS......
Brent
Seawolf
> You can't argue with people that are so brainwashed they won't let any
> real information in.
Wow, in one sentense you distilled the Kerry vote........
Well, you can exchange words, but they will not listen. The
> UN is evil because they've been told it's evil.
To true, has nothin to do with the whole oil for food thing.......
The US is good because
> they've been told patriotism is about unquestioning loyalty, not that
> patriotism is utterly about making your government accountable.
This is just leftist propaganda.....say it enough, and the morons will
beleive you...
Bush is a
> Christian because he opposes abortion and says God every chance he gets,
> even though he's about as close to acting like Christ as 0 is to infinity.
So you know God personnaly? You know how he acts??
> No amount of reality gets through their filter if it contradicts what they
> want to believe.
Once again you are projecting the lefts behavior onto the right
> "Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true."
> --Francis Bacon
Your signature is completely contrary to what your post is trying to
potray.......
Brent
Homer Sampson
Goddamn you're stupid. I'll repeat myself:
"the thread was about murder and rape of Iraqis."
>>
>> (2) Why you think an allegation by someone as respected and vindicated as
>> Seymour Hersh doesn't merit more than being just a statement that you
>> seem to blithely disregard,
>
> Because it is just an allegation! How hard is that for you to understand?
Very hard. This is Seymour Hersh, one of the key people involved in breaking
the Abu Ghraib scandal. He is a serious, qualified, reliable reporter. If he
says it, then it deserves very serious scrutiny, and a very strong
presumption of truth. This is not Joe nobody on the street making these
claims.
Homer Sampson
>
> "Homer Sampson" <m...@me.com> wrote in message
> news:zK6dndyo753...@comcast.com...
>> You can't argue with people that are so brainwashed they won't let any
>> real information in.
>
> Wow, in one sentense you distilled the Kerry vote........
No, I didn't. I was talking about you, and every word you type bolsters my
argument.
>
> Well, you can exchange words, but they will not listen. The
>> UN is evil because they've been told it's evil.
>
> To true, has nothin to do with the whole oil for food thing.......
See above.
> The US is good because
>> they've been told patriotism is about unquestioning loyalty, not that
>> patriotism is utterly about making your government accountable.
>
> This is just leftist propaganda.....say it enough, and the morons will
> beleive you...
See above.
>
> Bush is a
>> Christian because he opposes abortion and says God every chance he gets,
>> even though he's about as close to acting like Christ as 0 is to
>> infinity.
>
> So you know God personnaly? You know how he acts??
I know a good deal about the Christian faith, and have read a great deal of
the Bible. Bush is the antithesis of not just Jesus actions, but his message
of love and peace.
>> No amount of reality gets through their filter if it contradicts what
>> they want to believe.
>
> Once again you are projecting the lefts behavior onto the right
See top.
>> "Man prefers to believe what he prefers to be true."
>> --Francis Bacon
>
> Your signature is completely contrary to what your post is trying to
> potray.......
No, it's not. You prefer to believe the lies Bush tells you because you
prefer Bush to be telling the truth. Because if Bush isn't a truth-teller,
and Iraq really was a war based on deliberate lies, then you have to admit
we killed human beings for a war based on lies. And unless you're an even
more vile human being than you've already shown yourself to be, that is
something you do NOT want to have to admit to yourself.
Roedy Green
<loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote or quoted :
>Something does not quite ring true to me the way Republicans pretend
>they are proud of the atrocities and tortures Bush has ordered in
>Iraq.
Sometimes the Bushites try to deny the atrocities, while
simultaneously reveling in them.
"This so-called ill treatment and torture in detention centers,
stories of which were spread everywhere among the people, and later by
the prisoners who were freed were not, as some assumed, inflicted
methodically, but were excesses committed by individual prison guards,
their deputies, and men who laid violent hands on the detainees."
~ Rudolph Hoess, Auschwitz Kommandant
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>Ahh, yes. Forcing Abu Gahrab prisoners to stand naked in front of women is
>totaly on par with masked terrorists cutting of the heads of
>civillians............
No it is not. American behead Iraqis too. Have a look at my web page.
http://mindprod.com/iraq.html
Keep in mind, you invaded them illegally. Morally and legally they
have every right to repel you by all means necessary. You have none to
fight them.
The parading is one of the gentler of the sexual abuses.
For a more complete list see http://mindprod.com/iraq.html#ATROCITIES
Not all of them would turn your crank.
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>The whole part of how an allegation becomes fact without proof on these
>NGs....
I show you pictures. I show you back up, if you go to my website.
Seymour Hersh is not some clown. He is a Pulitzer prize winner. He
writes for the New Yorker. He broke Mai Lai and Abu Ghraib. It is not
as if this was just some story picked off a blog.
There is a whole book of detail.
Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib
Seymour M. Hersh
Amazon
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060195916/canadianmindprod
http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060195916/canadianmindp-20
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060195916/canadianmindp-21
http://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060195916/canadianmin0b-21
Barnes & Noble
http://service.bfast.com/bfast/click?bfmid=2181&sourceid=39378888&bfpid=0060195916&bfmtype=book
Chapters Indigo (Canada)
http://chapters.indigo.ca/Affiliates/ItemPage.asp?PRODUCTTYPE=1&AFFID=109369&ISBN=0060195916
On what grounds do you dismiss him out of hand?
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>Because the lefties want to equate what happened at Abu Gharib with what is
>happening to civillians in Iraq......
You are torturing young boys with anal rape at Abu Ghraib. Surely you
consider them civilians. Women are being tortured at Abu Ghraib.
Surely you consider them civilians.
Most of the people killed so far in this stinking war have been
civilians. And most of them have been kids.
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>This accusasion has no basis in reality.....
>
>> http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040717-082858-3675r.htm
And what have you done to investigate? NOTHING. You just decided you
don't like it. So you plugged your ears like a 2 year old.
You have not even read the story have you in Bush's "favourite
newspaper".
Bush has kiddie rape porn videos made at Abu Ghraib.
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>> The problem is the UN does not have enough power to reign in the
>> members of the security council, each of whom has a veto.
>
>So true....we should le Khofi run the world! He can't even controll what
>his own son does!!
>>
Kofi is the secretary general, but the security council makes the
decisions. He is just a day to day administrator. It is amazing you
have such strong opinions about something you know so little about.
John Starrett
> Forcing Abu Gahrab prisoners to stand naked in front of women is
> totaly on par with masked terrorists cutting of the heads of
> civillians............
In a way, it is. Considering what we expect from American soldiers, and
what we expect from Arab terrorists, both are repugnant to members of
the moderate members of the respective societies.
John Starrett
ouroboros rex
Simply a lie. We didn't burn 30,000 kids alive at Abu Ghraib, we just
buttf--ked a few.
>
> The whole
>> point is that it's much more than prisoners being paraded around naked
>
> Really? What is the point then? I would love to hear it.........
13 deaths under torture.
>
>>
>> (2) Why you think an allegation by someone as respected and vindicated as
>> Seymour Hersh doesn't merit more than being just a statement that you
>> seem to blithely disregard,
>
> Because it is just an allegation!
With photos.
How hard is that for you to understand?
>
>
> not as if it wasn't a proven fact, but as if it was
>> completely meritless and false.
>
> Is it a proven fact? No, it's not!
Cite?
When it is proven, then I will address
> it,
I doubt it.
Swiss Observer
I saw that hideous Frank Gaffney on BBC, and everytime the
interviewer, Katy Kay, mentioned "torture" he rephrased it as
"discomfort levels". Just fucking fantastic!
When awful Porter Goss was on HardTalk with Tim Sebastian, every time
Tim mentioned the Iraqi civilian casualties, Goss rephrased it as
"collateral damage" -- finally near the end of the show, after the
fourth time this happened, Tim said "you keep saying collateral
damage, we're talking about 15,000 dead civilians for what your own
president has called a mistake". (This was before the Johns Hopkins
study showing 100,000 dead.)
On that show, by the way, Porter would not accept Tim referring to the
Kay and Dulfuer reports on no WMDs and Bush's acceptance of that last
October. He kept smirking and muttering that he's "not so sure".
Finally, Tim asked him if as an Intelligence Committee member he had
access to additional information, and stupid Goss smirked again and
nodded with a beneficent smile, implying that we'd soon all find out
how stupid we'd been to think there had been no WMDs.
Swiss Observer
<loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:19:25 GMT, "Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com>
>wrote or quoted :
>
>>Because the lefties want to equate what happened at Abu Gharib with what is
>>happening to civillians in Iraq......
>
>You are torturing young boys with anal rape at Abu Ghraib. Surely you
>consider them civilians. Women are being tortured at Abu Ghraib.
>Surely you consider them civilians.
>
>Most of the people killed so far in this stinking war have been
>civilians. And most of them have been kids.
>
And now the Brits in Basra have been tagged for the same crimes, alas.
Swiss Observer
>
>On 19-Jan-2005, Roedy Green <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I am proud to be an American
>>
>> and on the flip side
>>
>> I support the troops in Iraq.
>>
>>
>> On the front in a selected photo or artistic rendition by a famous
>> porn artist of one of the atrocities. see
>> http://mindprod.com/iraq.html#ATROCITIES
>>
>> On the back is one of the tortures or sexual abuses.
>>
>> See how many takers you get.
>
>How about a t-shirt that says: "Proud to support the U.N."
>
>on the back you could put pictures of a mountain of corpses in Rwanda, or
>burned out villages in Sudan, or stills from those nasty porno tapes shot by
>peacekeepers in the Congo, or the grisly scene on a Tel Aviv street corner
>moments after a suicide bombing... Yeah, that would be cool. Y'know, those
>U.N. guys make the Americans look like total pansies.
Excuse me, but you are not very well versed in recent history,
particularly with regard to the UN.
The UN secretariat begged the Security Council to reinforce the Dutch
peacekeepers in Rwanda, and ironically, it was the USA and France that
blocked any further effort to stop the genocide.
In the Sudan, the Security Council has not yet authorized any UN
peacekeeping, in the hopes that the African Union can do the job
(which obviously they can't), but the UN specialized agencies and
humanitarian NGOs are keeping millions alive in the meantime.
The UN peacekeeper rapes are tragic (not only in DR of Congo but in
Liberia and Sierra Leone as well) but are not the fault of the UN per
se -- the Security Council insists that peacekeeping forces must serve
under individual status-of-forces agreements with the contributing
countries, which always make the soldiers immune from prosecution
except in their home countries. This is all wrong, but the US is one
of the SC states insisting on this immunity for its soldiers. The UN
itself is PREVENTED from prosecuting these sadistic rapists.
The Tel Aviv suicide bombings are all very sad and what not, but they
have nothing to do with the UN. There are no UN peacekeepers in Israel
and Palestine, only UN humanitarian agencies. The suicide bombers are
demented individuals, quite unlike the state-organized IDF military
assassinations and wholesale civilian slaughters carried out by the
Israelis in the refugee camps. The UN people DO do their best to
protest these murders of Palestinian civilians, and for his trouble,
Peter Hansen, the UN humanitarian leader there, has just today been
fired from his job because the USA and Israel claimed that he was
biased.
It's not hard to be biased when you witness this slaughter day after
day. The Israelis also continally protest against BBC reporter Orla
Guerin for being biased, but I have personally seen her on TV being
shot at by IDF troops in the middle of her stand-up reports, three
times! In one of them, the Israelis hit her cameraman as she tried to
drive their Land Rover out of range with him hanging onto the side of
it.
Swiss Observer
<loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:16:26 GMT, hughb...@yesiree.ca wrote or
>quoted :
>
>>on the back you could put pictures of a mountain of corpses in Rwanda,
>
>I don't think you understand how the UN works. The U.N. did nothing
>about Rwanda because the _USA_ vetoed action.
>
>The problem is the UN does not have enough power to reign in the
>members of the security council, each of whom has a veto.
Right, the five permanent members have the veto, not the ten rotaters.
There's talk of expanding the SC, and expanding the number of member
states with vetoes as well!!!!!
>
>What we need is a MORE powerful UN where security council members too
>have to submit to rule of law.
Hear, hear! Except that everyone knows that the USA would simply stop
paying its dues. It would be the UNESCO fiasco all over again.
>
>Further, strictly speaking the UN had no right to intervene in Rwanda.
>It is allowed to meddle only in affairs BETWEEN countries.
That's not actually true. You may be thinking of the ICJ or World
Court, which hands nation-vs-nation disputes.
>
>Again, we need a STRONGER UN that enforces basic human rights INSIDE
>countries too.
Swiss Observer
<loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 07:11:59 GMT, "Seawolf" <Seaw...@sc.rr.com>
>wrote or quoted :
>
>>> The problem is the UN does not have enough power to reign in the
>>> members of the security council, each of whom has a veto.
>>
>>So true....we should le Khofi run the world! He can't even controll what
>>his own son does!!
>>>
>
>Kofi is the secretary general, but the security council makes the
>decisions. He is just a day to day administrator. It is amazing you
>have such strong opinions about something you know so little about.
>
>
So many people think that the SG is the king of the world and should
be responsible for everything. As you say, he is the servant of the
member states, especially the Security Council, and must carry out
their will. (I work for a treaty secretariat, so believe me, I know!)
About the most he can venture to do is to issue a "factual"
interpretation of something in light of existing rules, as when he
said that strictly speaking the US invasion of Iraq was "illegal", but
even that was pretty venturesome of him.
In my view, Kofi is pretty close to being one of the best humans who's
ever lived. What a stud diplomat!
Swiss Observer
>You can't argue with people that are so brainwashed they won't let any real
>information in. Well, you can exchange words, but they will not listen. The
>UN is evil because they've been told it's evil. The US is good because
>they've been told patriotism is about unquestioning loyalty, not that
>patriotism is utterly about making your government accountable. Bush is a
>Christian because he opposes abortion and says God every chance he gets,
>even though he's about as close to acting like Christ as 0 is to infinity.
>No amount of reality gets through their filter if it contradicts what they
>want to believe.
Many or most of the UN personnel whom I know are not worth much, just
hanging on for their pensions and doing as little as possible, but the
organization as a whole is all we've got, and at the same time I'm
always impressed at the super high quality of the top personnel, like
Kofi and his sidekicks (especially Shashi Tharoor and Fred Eckhard),
Rudd Lubbers, Sergio de Mello, Carol Bellamy, Jan Egeland, Mary
Robinson, the UNESCO Japanese guy what-his-name, the elections lady,
even Töpfer the UNEP chief, and many more. However indulgent the UN
may have to be with the regular workers, the best of them do seem to
rise to the top.
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>And now the Brits in Basra have been tagged for the same crimes, alas.
I don't know if the Brits descended to child rape, just torturing
prisoners.
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>I saw that hideous Frank Gaffney on BBC, and everytime the
>interviewer, Katy Kay, mentioned "torture" he rephrased it as
>"discomfort levels". Just fucking fantastic!
It would be fun if you were an interviewer to say something like,
"Let's show the audience how this has all been blown out of
proportion. Let us demonstrate some of these 'discomfort levels' for
a few minutes on a volunteer, you for example, to put these rumours to
rest, shall we?"
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>In my view, Kofi is pretty close to being one of the best humans who's
>ever lived. What a stud diplomat!
The Secretary General has such a difficult job and so little formal
power. Whatever power he has comes from his ability to jawbone.
It burns me up when people blame the U.N. for something that their OWN
country vetoed.
Roedy Green
<rpw...@risource.biz> wrote or quoted :
>Your spelling indicates that you're a high school drop-out. The content of
>your posts and immature arguments confirm it. Stop wasting bandwidth, asshole.
You are new here. And this was your first experiment into posts over a
single line long. All your other posts were one line wise-ass cracks
with no information content. Despite his silly name, Homer Sampson has
a higher information content/bandwidth ratio than you.
Nevertheless, I don't plonk you. I am giving you some time to hit your
stride. Perhaps you are just too timid at this point to commit
yourself to anything of substance.
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>>What we need is a MORE powerful UN where security council members too
>>have to submit to rule of law.
>
>Hear, hear! Except that everyone knows that the USA would simply stop
>paying its dues. It would be the UNESCO fiasco all over again.
I think the idea was to gradually wean the powerful states into the
idea of law, by having a sort of pretend rule of law they could bust
out of with a veto or a bit of doubletalk.
Everyone has become far too comfortable with the collapse of the
Soviet Union. We don't seem to get it that the coming rivalries
between the emerging superpowers: China, India, Brazil, the EU
(possibly expanded with Russia), will mean a nuclear war if we don't
develop an IMPROVED U.N. to deal with them.
Given the economic collapse of the USA, and the rapid economic
expansion of her rivals, there is no way the USA can single handedly
rule the roost indefinitely. Look at how stretched the USA is dealing
with a single country she selected for token destruction, Iraq. That
country was completely disarmed (not a single plane, nuke, gun capable
of shooting down a plane or even a can of gas), non-provoking, without
allies, with an unpopular government and TINY.
"How bad do you have to suck to lose a popularity contest with Saddam
Hussein?"
~ Bill Maher
Bush wants to go backwards to the scheme used in the 1800s that
GUARANTEED periodic wars. That's doable if none of those countries
have nukes, but that is no longer so.
"This organisation [the U.N.] is created to keep you from going to
hell. It isn't created to take you to heaven."
~ Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. Republican Senator and U.S. Delegate to the UN
1955.
Bush has kiddie rape porn videos made at Abu Ghraib.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040717-082858-3675r.htm
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>The UN secretariat begged the Security Council to reinforce the Dutch
>peacekeepers in Rwanda, and ironically, it was the USA and France that
>blocked any further effort to stop the genocide.
In an interview Clinton said he figured that was the biggest mistake
of his presidency (other than, I guess, not getting the blue dress
properly cleaned).
He said his reason was the sour taste of trying to help in Somalia
where there was no government -- just chaos, and from the fuss of
Kosovo. It just slipped under radar as not as important as it turned
out to be.
In retrospect, it would have been a very difficult intervention.
Westerners could not even tell the warring parties apart. It was an
internal matter, strictly speaking outside the realm of the U.N.
Charter.
How does killing even more Rwandans help stem the flow of blood? It
has been done, e.g. Cyprus, but is very difficult and LONG TERM work.
What would you do, put drugs in the water to cool everyone out?
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>BTW, regardless of your socialist rants....YES!! I AM PROUD TO BE AN
>AMERICAN!!!! SORRY YOU AREN'T!!!!
My rants on torture have nothing to do with socialism. If you want to
debate socialism, let's start a thread on it.
Swiss Observer
<loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:51:44 +0100, Swiss Observer <dp...@iprolink.ch>
>wrote or quoted :
>
>>>What we need is a MORE powerful UN where security council members too
>>>have to submit to rule of law.
>>
>>Hear, hear! Except that everyone knows that the USA would simply stop
>>paying its dues. It would be the UNESCO fiasco all over again.
>
>I think the idea was to gradually wean the powerful states into the
>idea of law, by having a sort of pretend rule of law they could bust
>out of with a veto or a bit of doubletalk.
The new EU constitution (which will probably be unworkable, if even
ratified) preserves the veto for certain key subjects but removes it
for many more routine matters. I suppose they intend this to be a
wedge towards eventually removing it entirely.
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>The new EU constitution (which will probably be unworkable, if even
>ratified) preserves the veto for certain key subjects but removes it
>for many more routine matters. I suppose they intend this to be a
>wedge towards eventually removing it entirely.
I wonder if possibly the EU may become the new U.N. It gradually takes
over country after country, getting them to surrender the right to war
with the others, committing them to democracy and basic human rights.
I was at a public meeting. The Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Bill Graham was there. The topic was Bush and Iraq. Canadians were
very concerned about Canadian sovereignty. Someone asked about he
possibility of Canada joining the EU as a way of protecting ourselves
against the USA. There was a great roar of approval. Graham looked
startled and said it was preposterous because we are not physically
connected to Europe. (Neither is Britain or Iceland which have
considered it.)
I find it quite amusing that Germany today was able to "conquer" all
of Europe by patience, where Hitler with violence failed miserably.
Bush has kiddie porn anal rape videos made at Abu Ghraib.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040717-082858-3675r.htm
imascot
o...@mindprod.com.invalid says...
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 09:46:12 +0100, Swiss Observer <dp...@iprolink.ch>
> wrote or quoted :
>
> >The new EU constitution (which will probably be unworkable, if even
> >ratified) preserves the veto for certain key subjects but removes it
> >for many more routine matters. I suppose they intend this to be a
> >wedge towards eventually removing it entirely.
>
> I wonder if possibly the EU may become the new U.N. It gradually takes
> over country after country, getting them to surrender the right to war
> with the others, committing them to democracy and basic human rights.
>
> I was at a public meeting. The Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs,
> Bill Graham was there. The topic was Bush and Iraq. Canadians were
> very concerned about Canadian sovereignty. Someone asked about he
> possibility of Canada joining the EU as a way of protecting ourselves
> against the USA. There was a great roar of approval. Graham looked
> startled and said it was preposterous because we are not physically
> connected to Europe. (Neither is Britain or Iceland which have
> considered it.)
>
> I find it quite amusing that Germany today was able to "conquer" all
> of Europe by patience, where Hitler with violence failed miserably.
>
>
>
J.
>
--
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
-- Thomas Jefferson, founder of the former United States of America
Roedy Green
<rpw...@risource.biz> wrote or quoted :
>I wouldn't want Canada's bank rate and the resultant fiscal policy linked to
>the EU any more than I would like to see Canada adopting the US dollar and
>having it controlled by the US Fed.
According to ex-defense Minister Paul Hellyer, the alternative is
complete domination by the USA. The trappings of independence will
carry on a while, but no substance.
That is worse.
Roedy Green
<rpw...@risource.biz> wrote or quoted :
>
>Inviting Canada to be part of the EU would be like Australia or New Zealand
>joining. They have no point of reference, either do we.
It would change the nature of the EU to a global democratic union,
sort of super UN. It might be too tightly coupled for that purpose.
You can drive from EU country to EU country without even waving hello
to a customs officer.
The alternative is being swallowed up and totally controlled by the
same corporate interests that run the USA. Canadians don't want to
lose their health care, social safety net, environmental protection.
The Americans are working hard to destroy them.
Roedy Green
<rpw...@risource.biz> wrote or quoted :
> The HMO's have invested over $3 Billion in anti-social health
>propaganda since 1993, it was successful in defeating Clinton's notion of a
>public health system.
It is absolutely amazing how many gullible Americans are proud of
being ripped off by HMOs, are proud finding themselves without
coverage if every anything serious happens to them. They are proud
that the HMO overrides the doctor's choice of treatment. They are
proud the HMO gets to choose their doctor for them. Their little
hearts beat with joy realising what a huge percentage of Americans go
without any health care at all, roaming the streets and malls passing
on treatable communicable diseases.
They focus on the one weakness in the Canadian system -- long waits
for non-life threatening surgery -- mostly hip replacements. They even
ignore the fact that Canadians discussed the matter all over the
country and decided to put $42 billion of their surplus into
shortening those times.
In the meantime they spread lies about long waits for cardiac or other
life threatening surgery.
They try to make Canada sound foolish for running their facilities at
near capacity, and farming off overflow to the underused American
hospitals. It is cheaper to do that than build extra facilities. That
is sound management. American hospitals often have very expensive
equipment going largely unused. It is there just for prestige.
Roedy Green
<rpw...@risource.biz> wrote or quoted :
>They have a shortage due to physicians suffering huge malpractice insurance
>costs, we have a shortage in similar communities which has nothing to do with
>their problem, but both have the same issue. A shortage of doctors.
I lived on a small island in rural BC and was served by two first
class doctors. They even did house calls. What happens there is rural
doctors are willing to take a cut in pay to live in pristine
surroundings.
Other rural areas, not so picturesque were in much more serious
trouble. A doctor would be overworked, and eventually would quit to
avoid the stress, leaving the remaining doctors even more stressed.
BC has a policy of forcing NEW doctors to go to the rural areas to cut
their teeth.
Doctors both in the USA and Canada don't ON AVERAGE make as much money
as they did a generation ago, though some superstars rake in the
dough. HMO doctors have very little prestige or autonomy. Yet the
costs of education are even higher. No wonder fewer are attracted to
the profession, that was once a calling and now was more treated as a
business.
Roedy Green
<rpw...@risource.biz> wrote or quoted :
>The cost of raising a kid and sending him/her to university in the US is
>extremely high compared to Canada (and we complain).
I think we should go back to the scheme we had in the 60s. If you
were a bright kid you could put yourself through college, including
room and board, without coming out the end with a heavy debt.
You pay it back later in life when you start earning the big bucks in
the form of taxes. You want to do everything you can to encourage
everyone to get as much education as they are capable of swallowing.
That is what makes the country as a whole prosperous.
Swiss Observer
<rpw...@risource.biz> wrote:
>Roedy Green wrote in message: news:<a5r3v0h6188hsl3ui...@4ax.com>
>> On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 00:27:48 -0500, Altair Voyager
>> <rpw...@risource.biz> wrote or quoted :
>>
>> >The cost of raising a kid and sending him/her to university in the US is
>> >extremely high compared to Canada (and we complain).
>>
>> I think we should go back to the scheme we had in the 60s. If you
>> were a bright kid you could put yourself through college, including
>> room and board, without coming out the end with a heavy debt.
>>
>> You pay it back later in life when you start earning the big bucks in
>> the form of taxes. You want to do everything you can to encourage
>> everyone to get as much education as they are capable of swallowing.
>>
>> That is what makes the country as a whole prosperous.
>>
>>
>
>I agree. My Dad's first job was building HYW 401 as a construction worker
>after the war (he was a flight engineer with Bomber Command in WW2, one of the
>most dangerous jobs). He eventually moved to the University of Toronto and
>became an Engineer, then a Professional Engineer.
>
>By '58, when I was born, he was working at Chalk River with Nuclear toys, some
>of his friends from school were working with AV Roe. When that fell apart for
>them, a lot of them moved to NASA in the USA.
>
>I put myself through "college" with my athletics. My undergrad was when I
>played hockey with the Cornell Reds, my MBA came much later when I saved up and
>worked hard for it while attending The University of Western Ontario.
>
>I've worked in the USA, France, Malaysia and the UK. I'm very happy to be back
>in Canada. My vision of retirement is to end up in Europe somewhere.
This has been a really informative discussion about health care in
Canada. Thanks to you both.
John S. Dyson
Roedy Green <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> writes:
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 23:18:04 -0500, Altair Voyager
> <rpw...@risource.biz> wrote or quoted :
>
>> The HMO's have invested over $3 Billion in anti-social health
>>propaganda since 1993, it was successful in defeating Clinton's notion of a
>>public health system.
>
> It is absolutely amazing how many gullible Americans are proud of
> being ripped off by HMOs, are proud finding themselves without
> coverage if every anything serious happens to them.
>
I choose PPO.) BTW, one of my Canadian family members is apparently
being left to die by the Canadian system (while his brother was maintained
with that illness for approx 20yrs by the American system.) Luckily,
he does have access to the American system, and will probably be allowed
to live due to an effective dual citizenship.
John
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>>I've worked in the USA, France, Malaysia and the UK.
Even back in 1985 in the USA most of the people I knew were employed,
but still had no health care. They would go around sick and do
nothing about it.
In Malaysia and Indonesia every gum stand has three sales clerks. If
you go to a department store, they assign you a person to help you
shop. They lead you around the store to help you find stuff.
When I arrived in Malaysia, a was assigned my own waiter. I was quite
tired. He selected food from the smorgasbord.
They have a different emphasis -- make sure everyone has some sort of
work.
In North American the system is designed so there is always a shortage
of jobs. Mathematically 10% or so of people who would like jobs can't
have them no matter how hard they try. But what I find really nasty is
people STILL blame those without jobs for laziness. I can see blaming
someone who turns down a job, but you can't blame everyone without a
job for a situation deliberately created by the corporations, cherry
picking to create an efficient and docile workforce.
Roedy Green
Dyson) wrote or quoted :
> BTW, one of my Canadian family members is apparently
>being left to die by the Canadian system (while his brother was maintained
>with that illness for approx 20yrs by the American system.)
What is the disease?
Robert Sveinson
"Roedy Green" <loo...@mindprod.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:rcr5v0homhrc7jkoc...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 18:38:19 +0000 (UTC), to...@iquest.net (John S.
> Dyson) wrote or quoted :
>
> > BTW, one of my Canadian family members is apparently
> >being left to die by the Canadian system (while his brother was
maintained
> >with that illness for approx 20yrs by the American system.)
>
> What is the disease?
Canadian was run over by a train!
American has a hang nail!