Auckland is turning into a dump (Auckland has turned into a dump)
Eric
Save Auckland,..................... Auckland needs "Graffiti police"
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.410 / Virus Database: 231 - Release Date: 31/10/02
nash_the_slash
masquerades at the moment.
slunk
news:10362675...@cereal.attica.net.nz...
> 1st of all they need a real Police Force, not the tin pot 2 bit outfit
that
> masquerades at the moment.
I had a dealing with the coppers in the last few years (note 1 dealing and a
FEW YEARS). I needed them in 2000 and they got back to me over a year
later.
A friend got her cards pinched and her bank account cleaned out and the ASB
Bank did more work than the police, who as far as I know, did jack shit.
David McNab
> With graffiti all over the place and rubbish in the streets too
Take away the grafitti and rubbish, and Aucland will still be a dump :)
Gimme the Windy City anytime!
David
G Swaine
> Eric wrote:
> > With graffiti all over the place and rubbish in the streets too
Do your bit by supporting the Tag-Out Trust (a nonprofit group
[charity?] that goes around Auckland, removing graffiti)
Or else get taggers to remove at least twice as much graffiti as they
created.
The prime cause of graffiti is the great expanse of walls/surfaces
with nothing on them - just a bland one-colour painted surface. That
just begs for a but of graffiti by someone trying to lay their claim
to fame.
Or do as some places have, and make some of them into a mural or
something and make sure someone takes care of it - they rarely get re
bombed if it shows someone cares for it.
> Take away the grafitti and rubbish, and Aucland will still be a dump
:)
>
> Gimme the Windy City anytime!
Q: Why do you think Auckland has turned into a dump?
A: The Windy City has blown all its garbage up here!
--
Quote for the month
"It's a bit hard to drink when it's upside down"
(Overheard while I was working at a recent Rugby League match)
--
g.sw...@the.gluepot is a bogus address. I can be contacted via an
intermediary: gem at gem win co nz. I apologise to the genuine
respondents that this may inconvenience.
Peter H.M. Brooks
"G Swaine" <g.sw...@the.gluepot.com> wrote in message
news:aq1uul$o79$1...@news.comnet.co.nz...
> "
>
> The prime cause of graffiti is the great expanse of walls/surfaces
> with nothing on them - just a bland one-colour painted surface. That
> just begs for a but of graffiti by someone trying to lay their claim
> to fame.
>
> Or do as some places have, and make some of them into a mural or
> something and make sure someone takes care of it - they rarely get re
> bombed if it shows someone cares for it.
>
best solution - it would give work to artists and make the place more
attractive.
--
The grandeur of real art, on the contrary, . . . is to rediscover, grasp
again and lay before us that reality from which we become more and more
separated as the formal knowledge which we substitute for it grows in
thickness and imperviousness--that reality which there is grave danger we
might die without ever having known and yet which is simply our life, life
as it really is, life disclosed and made clear . . . .
- Vladimir Nabokov "Marcel Proust (1871-1922)"
Bobs
Not all of Auckland is like Otara.
Eric wrote:
--
I wasn't made in Gods image. He was made in mine.
grimly bubble
"Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@new.co.za> wrote in message
news:aq2fjm$gri$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
>
> "G Swaine" <g.sw...@the.gluepot.com> wrote in message
> news:aq1uul$o79$1...@news.comnet.co.nz...
> > "
> >
> > The prime cause of graffiti is the great expanse of walls/surfaces
> > with nothing on them - just a bland one-colour painted surface. That
> > just begs for a but of graffiti by someone trying to lay their claim
> > to fame.
> >
> > Or do as some places have, and make some of them into a mural or
> > something and make sure someone takes care of it - they rarely get re
> > bombed if it shows someone cares for it.
> >
> Getting a fund together to commission artists to produce murals would be
the
> best solution - it would give work to artists and make the place more
> attractive.
Oh sure....artists deserve to be hanging on the public tit.
grimly bubble
"Bobs" <bl...@extra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:3DC4CA4F...@extra.co.nz...
> I was in Parnell today. The place is fantastic.
>
> Not all of Auckland is like Otara.
I was in Otara the other day....it was fantastic, not all of Auckland is
like Parnell.
Peter H.M. Brooks
"grimly bubble" <tauranga...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
news:3dc4f8ca$1...@clear.net.nz...
>
> "Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@new.co.za> wrote in message
> news:aq2fjm$gri$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
> >
> > "G Swaine" <g.sw...@the.gluepot.com> wrote in message
> > news:aq1uul$o79$1...@news.comnet.co.nz...
> > > "
> > >
> > > The prime cause of graffiti is the great expanse of walls/surfaces
> > > with nothing on them - just a bland one-colour painted surface. That
> > > just begs for a but of graffiti by someone trying to lay their claim
> > > to fame.
> > >
> > > Or do as some places have, and make some of them into a mural or
> > > something and make sure someone takes care of it - they rarely get re
> > > bombed if it shows someone cares for it.
> > >
> > Getting a fund together to commission artists to produce murals would be
> the
> > best solution - it would give work to artists and make the place more
> > attractive.
>
> Oh sure....artists deserve to be hanging on the public tit.
>
on since Ancient Egypt.
David Bisman
> > Eric wrote:
> > > With graffiti all over the place and rubbish in the streets too
>
> Do your bit by supporting the Tag-Out Trust (a nonprofit group
> [charity?] that goes around Auckland, removing graffiti)
>
> Or else get taggers to remove at least twice as much graffiti as they
> created.
>
>
> The prime cause of graffiti is the great expanse of walls/surfaces
> with nothing on them - just a bland one-colour painted surface. That
> just begs for a but of graffiti by someone trying to lay their claim
> to fame.
No. The prime cause of graffiti is the total disrespect that certain
people have for the property of others. Saying the way walls loook is
just begging to be defaced is like saying that certain women deserve
to be raped for the way they dress or that some people are just
begging to be mugged or murdered for dressing a particular way; some
cars are just begging to be converted/keyed because of their
design/colour scheme... This attitude is what is wrong with Auckland
and why so many people who understand right and wrong and who prefer
to have laws and have them obeyed choose to live as far away from the
place as possible.
> Or do as some places have, and make some of them into a mural or
> something and make sure someone takes care of it - they rarely get re
> bombed if it shows someone cares for it.
Yes. Pay "artists" to paint walls so that other "artists" won't come
around and paint them! This is a protection racket and what about the
choice of the owner to have a plain wall?
> > Take away the grafitti and rubbish, and Aucland will still be a dump
> :)
> >
> > Gimme the Windy City anytime!
>
> Q: Why do you think Auckland has turned into a dump?
>
> A: The Windy City has blown all its garbage up here!
Actually Helen and her crowd drifted sown from Auckland and currently
pollute the capital.
Cheers
David Bisman
Dunedin
New Zealand
Mutley
At least Parnell dosen't have roller doors over all it's shopping
center. Sorta tells you what the locals in Otara are like???
ppp
"Mutley" <mutle...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:r94bsu4bib5vus241...@4ax.com...
Put an electric fence around Otara. That would reduce graffiti by 50%.
Lyn
Did the Russians contribute to 'ART' during the communist regime?
Lyn
Bobs
David Bisman wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > The prime cause of graffiti is the great expanse of walls/surfaces
> > with nothing on them - just a bland one-colour painted surface. That
> > just begs for a but of graffiti by someone trying to lay their claim
> > to fame.
>
> No. The prime cause of graffiti is the total disrespect that certain
> people have for the property of others. Saying the way walls loook is
> just begging to be defaced is like saying that certain women deserve
> to be raped for the way they dress or that some people are just
> begging to be mugged or murdered for dressing a particular way; some
> cars are just begging to be converted/keyed because of their
> design/colour scheme... This attitude is what is wrong with Auckland
> and why so many people who understand right and wrong and who prefer
> to have laws and have them obeyed choose to live as far away from the
> place as possible.
Yes, because we all know Dunedin is a booming city don't we David?
Bobs
grimly bubble wrote:
> "Bobs" <bl...@extra.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:3DC4CA4F...@extra.co.nz...
> > I was in Parnell today. The place is fantastic.
> >
> > Not all of Auckland is like Otara.
>
> I was in Otara the other day....it was fantastic,
So you like underage hookers, drug dealing, rampant tagging, and domestic
violence?
Sorry if I upset your little PC world you pathetic pile of scrotum fluff.
Peter H.M. Brooks
"Lyn" <hd...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
>
> Did the Russians contribute to 'ART' during the communist regime?
>
However the Soviet Union contributed a huge amount to art of all sorts. I
went to a ballet at the Borshoi theatre in Moscow that was one of the best I
have ever seen and it cost me ten roubles - less than a pound then - because
Art was to be approachable. The week I was in Moscow I also went to a
breathtaking performance at the Winter Palace a vast theatre that was
completely packed with people, there must have been at least two thousand.
It was mid-winter and -20C outside so it was interesting to see bear-like
bundles of fur come into the mirror-lined changing room downstairs and,
after handing their furs to the rows of cloakroom attendants emerge in smart
suits and glittering ball gowns.
Yes, Russia has long been a place that cherished the arts and, during the
Soviet era it was one of the things, if no the thing, that they did best.
David Bisman
T.N.O. @ Work
for most of my life???
"David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d7d9f309.02110...@posting.google.com...
David Bisman
> "Lyn" <hd...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
> >
> > Did the Russians contribute to 'ART' during the communist regime?
> >
> That seems a very peculiar question - I don't see it's relevance.
>
> However the Soviet Union contributed a huge amount to art of all sorts. I
> went to a ballet at the Borshoi theatre in Moscow that was one of the best I
> have ever seen and it cost me ten roubles - less than a pound then - because
> Art was to be approachable. The week I was in Moscow I also went to a
> breathtaking performance at the Winter Palace a vast theatre that was
> completely packed with people, there must have been at least two thousand.
> It was mid-winter and -20C outside so it was interesting to see bear-like
> bundles of fur come into the mirror-lined changing room downstairs and,
> after handing their furs to the rows of cloakroom attendants emerge in smart
> suits and glittering ball gowns.
The "Bolshoi" (tr. "big") theatre was over the back fence of where I
stayed the first time I was in Moscow. The locals treated it with
scorn as a tourist trap and called it "nye kulturni" (tr. "without
culture"). I attended a production of Swan Lake at the Tchaikovsky
Theatre near Nagorno Plazhodh. It was where the local Russians went to
see the ballet - the price of a ticket was 2 Rubles and snacks
(including caviar and coffee) were available for 20 kopecks per
person. The ballet was magnificent and the price excellent but this
shows that the Soviets delivered art well, not that they created or
"contribute[d]" to ART - they did not. Even "Soviet Realism" was
slavish imitation of Nazi Art.
> Yes, Russia has long been a place that cherished the arts and, during the
> Soviet era it was one of the things, if no the thing, that they did best.
They delivered art well but waht they did best was public transport
(and murder). However they didn't contribute to art - largely because
the state handout was accompanied by the state jackboot.
David Bisman
I know of only two Dunedins in the whole world! But I am constantly
delighted by this city with its cultural diversity (I walk past an
Methodist Church, an Orthodox Church, a Roman Catholic Basilica, a
Samoan Church and a Spiritualist Church all nestled in semi industrial
suburbia each time I take the ten minute walk to the Supermarket. The
magnificence of our Public Art Gallery and our museums is rightly
reknown far and wide. We are extraordinarily well served for live
theatre and cafe culture. The St Clair redevelopment adds even more
sparkle to our superb coast and we have sporting facilities second to
none (Carisbrooke, for instance, is an instantly recognisable
international icon). Boasting the country's first botanical gardens
and first university (not to mention stock exchange, daily newspaper,
public library and golf course) the city takes its culture and its
education seriously but it works hard as well with traditional
industries like Fisher and Paykel, Glendermid and Cadburys as well as
groundbreaking newer ones like the world famous Natural History Unit.
Certainly, a city that boasts the world's youngest suburb and steepest
street as well as national treasures like Larnach's Castle, Olveston
and Glenfalloch and that regularly produces world class opera singers,
judges, scientists, sportspeople, visionaries and characters needs a
closer look. OK, I know what you'll say..."the Greeks praise Athens"
but I am not a native of Dunedin, I was born and raised in a larger
and more northern city but, after having lived in many NZ centres and
small settlements as well as several overseas I came 'home' to
Dunedin. Work is plentiful, living is cheap, people are friendly and
life is good. What more could we want? The first European settlers
rightly named this place as the Edin City As in Garden of Edin - Scots
Gaelic = Dunedin - Sassenach translation = Edinburgh).
T.N.O. @ Work
"David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d7d9f309.02110...@posting.google.com...
> I know of only two Dunedins in the whole world!
Here and California?
> But I am constantly
> delighted by this city with its cultural diversity (I walk past an
> Methodist Church, an Orthodox Church, a Roman Catholic Basilica, a
> Samoan Church and a Spiritualist Church all nestled in semi industrial
> suburbia each time I take the ten minute walk to the Supermarket.
yup, its diverse... but booming?
> The
> magnificence of our Public Art Gallery and our museums is rightly
> reknown far and wide. We are extraordinarily well served for live
> theatre and cafe culture.
yeah its not bad, but if you compare the cafe culture to ponsonby, parnell,
or wellington central it is nothing.
> The St Clair redevelopment adds even more
> sparkle to our superb coast and we have sporting facilities second to
> none (Carisbrooke, for instance, is an instantly recognisable
> international icon).
St clair is nice, but its just a beach, nothing more, nothing less. And
Carisbrook doesnt have an "e"
> Boasting the country's first botanical gardens
didnt know that...
> and first university (not to mention stock exchange, daily newspaper,
> public library and golf course) the city takes its culture and its
> education seriously but it works hard as well with traditional
> industries like Fisher and Paykel, Glendermid and Cadburys as well as
> groundbreaking newer ones like the world famous Natural History Unit.
didnt know that...
> Certainly, a city that boasts the world's youngest suburb
which one? surely this would be a short lived title...
> and steepest
> street as well as national treasures like Larnach's Castle, Olveston
> and Glenfalloch and that regularly produces world class opera singers,
> judges, scientists, sportspeople, visionaries and characters needs a
> closer look. OK, I know what you'll say..."the Greeks praise Athens"
> but I am not a native of Dunedin, I was born and raised in a larger
> and more northern city but, after having lived in many NZ centres and
> small settlements as well as several overseas I came 'home' to
> Dunedin.
Cool... it is a nice place to live... but again, booming?
> Work is plentiful,
This I dispute... work can be found, but not in any technical fields... try
getting a Computer tech job.
> living is cheap, people are friendly and
> life is good. What more could we want?
world piece, million dollars.
Patkiwi
Peter H.M. Brooks
"David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> person. The ballet was magnificent and the price excellent but this
> shows that the Soviets delivered art well, not that they created or
> "contribute[d]" to ART - they did not. Even "Soviet Realism" was
> slavish imitation of Nazi Art.
>
The first ballet that I saw was, in fact, a Soviet ballet. Since the Nazis
killed millions of Russians, it would seem rather strange for them to go in
for immitations of Nazi Art - how would you explain that?
>
> > Yes, Russia has long been a place that cherished the arts and, during
the
> > Soviet era it was one of the things, if no the thing, that they did
best.
>
> They delivered art well but waht they did best was public transport
> (and murder). However they didn't contribute to art - largely because
> the state handout was accompanied by the state jackboot.
>
I'm no commie, but you seem to have a rather powerful antipathy to something
that has been dead and buried for some time now!
The Moscow underground is also an artwork in itself - at least every station
is magnificently designed.
--
Her tall, slim figure was unsuited to 'breeches' parts, and after one
unfortunate appearance she wisely left these roles to Peg Woffington. - of
Elizabeth Farren (c.1759 - 1829) in A Dictionary of Irish Biography, Henry
Boylan
David Bisman
> reply is inline..
>
> "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d7d9f309.02110...@posting.google.com...
> > I know of only two Dunedins in the whole world!
>
> Here and California?
Here and Florida.
> > But I am constantly
> > delighted by this city with its cultural diversity (I walk past an
> > Methodist Church, an Orthodox Church, a Roman Catholic Basilica, a
> > Samoan Church and a Spiritualist Church all nestled in semi industrial
> > suburbia each time I take the ten minute walk to the Supermarket.
>
> yup, its diverse... but booming?
"Boom" times tend to be built on diversity more than any other factor
--> look at the boom times after the waves of immigration in NZ and
the depressions when we have closed our borders. An early PM (and the
founder of the ODT, NZs first daily newspaper), Sir Julius Vogel, (who
later became a Science Fiction writer) recognised this and built the
country on waves of immigration and massive infrastructure building...
it worked. Diversity breeds prosperity.
> > The
> > magnificence of our Public Art Gallery and our museums is rightly
> > reknown far and wide. We are extraordinarily well served for live
> > theatre and cafe culture.
>
> yeah its not bad, but if you compare the cafe culture to ponsonby, parnell,
> or wellington central it is nothing.
Dunedin is a city of 120,000 people so will suffer from any
comparisons to a conurbation of over a million because of economies of
scale. However, my point is this: Is the cafe culture of Auckland 10
times that of Dunedin? When one compares apples with apples Dunedin
comes out pretty damn good.
> > The St Clair redevelopment adds even more
> > sparkle to our superb coast and we have sporting facilities second to
> > none (Carisbrooke, for instance, is an instantly recognisable
> > international icon).
>
> St clair is nice, but its just a beach, nothing more, nothing less. And
> Carisbrook doesnt have an "e"
Yeah, so is Takapuna or Oriental Bay or Manley! And, sorry about the
spelling, I am a somewhat hamfisted two finger typist.
> > Boasting the country's first botanical gardens
>
> didnt know that...
Much about Dunedin that should be known is largely ignored - partly
because the preferred sources of National information (Television and
radio with national reach) are all centred in Auckland or Wellington
(Despite Dunedin having the first, and therefore the oldest, private
radio station in the country).
> > and first university (not to mention stock exchange, daily newspaper,
> > public library and golf course) the city takes its culture and its
> > education seriously but it works hard as well with traditional
> > industries like Fisher and Paykel, Glendermid and Cadburys as well as
> > groundbreaking newer ones like the world famous Natural History Unit.
>
> didnt know that...
And more and more.
> > Certainly, a city that boasts the world's youngest suburb
>
> which one? surely this would be a short lived title...
No, that's the interesting nature of this university town. North of
the Octagon from Moray Place to the end of North Road (by the Normanby
Pub) is officially the world's youngest suburb - according to the
official statistics 78% of its population is aged between 15 and 24 -
when I lived in the area I used to say that my mere presence raised
the average age by....
> > and steepest
> > street as well as national treasures like Larnach's Castle, Olveston
> > and Glenfalloch and that regularly produces world class opera singers,
> > judges, scientists, sportspeople, visionaries and characters needs a
> > closer look. OK, I know what you'll say..."the Greeks praise Athens"
> > but I am not a native of Dunedin, I was born and raised in a larger
> > and more northern city but, after having lived in many NZ centres and
> > small settlements as well as several overseas I came 'home' to
> > Dunedin.
>
> Cool... it is a nice place to live... but again, booming?
Dull and boring places tend not to boom. And again, yes. OK, we may
not have enough jobs for all Otago graduates but that is hardly
surprising as over half of them are from out of town to start with and
Otago is the second largest University in the country (Auckland - in
the largest conurbation is, unsurprisingly, the largest but only by a
few hundred students).
> > Work is plentiful,
>
> This I dispute... work can be found, but not in any technical fields... try
> getting a Computer tech job.
Dunedin has a great deal of such jobs (more per capita than Auckland
or Wellington) but an even greater number of qualified applicants.
This is the very mark of a booming city - I have a number of friends
who work in this field and they all confirm this.
> > living is cheap, people are friendly and
> > life is good. What more could we want?
>
> world piece, million dollars.
Which piece of the world (or is this proof that we can both make
spelling mistakes?)? And you can have as many millions of dollars as
you want - just earn them.
David Bisman
Edinborough was founded by Malcolm III approximately 900 years ago.
Burgh (var. burg or borough) originally meant fort but came to mean
city and, by the time of the founding of Edinborough this latter
meaning was firmly entrenched. As was Christianity. I can find no
reference anywhere to any early chief named Edin. Dun orignalky
referred to the colour that is still so named and came to mean town or
city by transferrance.
T.N.O.
> No, that's the interesting nature of this university town. North of
> the Octagon from Moray Place to the end of North Road (by the Normanby
> Pub) is officially the world's youngest suburb - according to the
> official statistics 78% of its population is aged between 15 and 24 -
> when I lived in the area I used to say that my mere presence raised
> the average age by....
OMG, I totally didnt see that coming, I was thinking more along the
lines of settlement dates, not age of occupants.
> Dunedin has a great deal of such jobs (more per capita than Auckland
> or Wellington) but an even greater number of qualified applicants.
> This is the very mark of a booming city - I have a number of friends
> who work in this field and they all confirm this.
any of them got any jobs going???
> Which piece of the world (or is this proof that we can both make
> spelling mistakes?)?
Little of both, I always put it like that, and I always get corrected...
I think that subconsiously(sp?) I do it on purpose...
> And you can have as many millions of dollars as
> you want - just earn them.
you sound like my father...
David Bisman
> "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > person. The ballet was magnificent and the price excellent but this
> > shows that the Soviets delivered art well, not that they created or
> > "contribute[d]" to ART - they did not. Even "Soviet Realism" was
> > slavish imitation of Nazi Art.
> >
> The first ballet that I saw was, in fact, a Soviet ballet. Since the Nazis
> killed millions of Russians, it would seem rather strange for them to go in
> for immitations of Nazi Art - how would you explain that?
One of the paradoxes of such a tyrrany.
> > > Yes, Russia has long been a place that cherished the arts and, during
> the
> > > Soviet era it was one of the things, if no the thing, that they did
> best.
> >
> > They delivered art well but waht they did best was public transport
> > (and murder). However they didn't contribute to art - largely because
> > the state handout was accompanied by the state jackboot.
> >
> I'm no commie, but you seem to have a rather powerful antipathy to something
> that has been dead and buried for some time now!
Yeah. I just can't seem to look back without rancour at a regime that
murdered millions, how unreasonable of me.
> The Moscow underground is also an artwork in itself - at least every station
> is magnificently designed.
Most were made from existing works of art that were stolen and
vandalised for the project.
ppp
"T.N.O. @ Work" <barr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3dc727ed$1@news...
> reply is inline..
>
> "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d7d9f309.02110...@posting.google.com...
> > I know of only two Dunedins in the whole world!
>
> Here and California?
>
> > But I am constantly
> > delighted by this city with its cultural diversity (I walk past an
> > Methodist Church, an Orthodox Church, a Roman Catholic Basilica, a
> > Samoan Church and a Spiritualist Church all nestled in semi industrial
> > suburbia each time I take the ten minute walk to the Supermarket.
>
> yup, its diverse... but booming?
Sorry, diversity is the code world for third world influxes. I can see why he's
delighted by this city, it's the whitest in the country. Which explains the
absence of grafitti, the low crime rate and the generally pleasant environment.
T.N.O.
> Sorry, diversity is the code world for third world influxes. I can see
> why he's
> delighted by this city, it's the whitest in the country. Which
> explains the
> absence of grafitti, the low crime rate and the generally pleasant
> environment.
well, ummm yeah, without trying to be racist, your right, it is really
white down there.
Lyn
"ppp" <y...@aaa.com> wrote in message
news:B__x9.1049$cB5.2...@news02.tsnz.net...
>
> "T.N.O. @ Work" <barr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3dc727ed$1@news...
> > reply is inline..
> >
> > "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:d7d9f309.02110...@posting.google.com...
he's
> delighted by this city, it's the whitest in the country. Which explains
the
> absence of grafitti, the low crime rate and the generally pleasant
environment.
The ODT reports a night time liquor ban in Dunedins inner city to try and
reduce the area's high crime rate. Sorry, but true, Dunedin is not lagging
behind other NZ cities in this.
Lyn
Dave
"Lyn" <hd...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message news:3dc5...@clear.net.nz...
> Did the Russians contribute to 'ART' during the communist regime?
> Lyn
Is that, truly, a serious question?
DW
Peter H.M. Brooks
during
> > the
> > > > Soviet era it was one of the things, if no the thing, that they did
> > best.
> > >
> > > They delivered art well but waht they did best was public transport
> > > (and murder). However they didn't contribute to art - largely because
> > > the state handout was accompanied by the state jackboot.
> > >
> > I'm no commie, but you seem to have a rather powerful antipathy to
something
> > that has been dead and buried for some time now!
>
> Yeah. I just can't seem to look back without rancour at a regime that
> murdered millions, how unreasonable of me.
>
million children in Iraq in just the last ten years - to mention only one of
its many atrocities?
>
> > The Moscow underground is also an artwork in itself - at least every
station
> > is magnificently designed.
>
> Most were made from existing works of art that were stolen and
> vandalised for the project.
>
--
Naturally base, raised by imaginary and unrepeating, cyclic, aeternity, with
unity we are mere nothing! My six glyphic friends and I.
Gnomon
wrote
>"Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@new.co.za> wrote in message news:<aq7hb3$5al$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>...
>> "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> > person. The ballet was magnificent and the price excellent but this
>> > shows that the Soviets delivered art well, not that they created or
>> > "contribute[d]" to ART - they did not. Even "Soviet Realism" was
>> > slavish imitation of Nazi Art.
>> >
>> The first ballet that I saw was, in fact, a Soviet ballet. Since the Nazis
>> killed millions of Russians, it would seem rather strange for them to go in
>> for immitations of Nazi Art - how would you explain that?
>
>One of the paradoxes of such a tyrrany.
>
>> > > Yes, Russia has long been a place that cherished the arts and, during
>> the
>> > > Soviet era it was one of the things, if no the thing, that they did
>> best.
>> >
>> > They delivered art well but waht they did best was public transport
>> > (and murder). However they didn't contribute to art - largely because
>> > the state handout was accompanied by the state jackboot.
>> >
>> I'm no commie, but you seem to have a rather powerful antipathy to something
>> that has been dead and buried for some time now!
>
>Yeah. I just can't seem to look back without rancour at a regime that
>murdered millions, how unreasonable of me.
As many as the criminal american trade sanctions against Iraq which
results in hundreds of thousands of innocent children dying?
As many as the criminal spraying of defoliants by american troops on
North Vietnam which resulted in thousands of innocent people, to say
nothing of eventually losing the war and having to retreat with
their tails between their legs.
Imagine that, being beaten by some "gooks".
>
>> The Moscow underground is also an artwork in itself - at least every station
>> is magnificently designed.
>
>Most were made from existing works of art that were stolen and
>vandalised for the project.
Even though the vast majority of subway art was commissioned for the
purpose. Get your facts correct sunshine.
David Bisman
Depends where you go. I spend time at Otakau Marae and one of my
flatmates is involved with Maori Women's Welfare and both are involved
with Kai Tahu Whanau, many of my friends are Maori or Pacific
Islanders... maybe you need to get out more? BTW, don't forget
Sukhindar Turner is our Mayor!
David Bisman
> David Bisman wrote:
>
> > No, that's the interesting nature of this university town. North of
> > the Octagon from Moray Place to the end of North Road (by the Normanby
> > Pub) is officially the world's youngest suburb - according to the
> > official statistics 78% of its population is aged between 15 and 24 -
> > when I lived in the area I used to say that my mere presence raised
> > the average age by....
>
>
> OMG, I totally didnt see that coming, I was thinking more along the
> lines of settlement dates, not age of occupants.
Interesting isn't it?
> > Dunedin has a great deal of such jobs (more per capita than Auckland
> > or Wellington) but an even greater number of qualified applicants.
> > This is the very mark of a booming city - I have a number of friends
> > who work in this field and they all confirm this.
>
>
> any of them got any jobs going???
Not that I know of at the moment - mostly they don't want to leave
Dunedin so they tend to hang onto them.
> > Which piece of the world (or is this proof that we can both make
> > spelling mistakes?)?
>
>
> Little of both, I always put it like that, and I always get corrected...
> I think that subconsiously(sp?) I do it on purpose...
I quite like the pun.
> > And you can have as many millions of dollars as
> > you want - just earn them.
>
>
> you sound like my father...
Sensible man.
David Pears
<pe...@new.co.za> wrote:
>So, how do you feel about the US regime that has murdered over half a
>million children in Iraq in just the last ten years - to mention only one of
>its many atrocities?
Er, if you're talking about the sanctions then they're UN sanctions.
Why blame the US and not the other UN member countries who are
supporting them. Like NZ for instance? Has NZ murdered over half a
million children in Iraq in just the last ten years?
David
Peter H.M. Brooks
"David Pears" <dpears...@bigfoot.com.au> wrote in message
news:of4isukmc6tb7pmhs...@4ax.com...
enforced by the US and UK and are part of the war of terror against the
Iraqi people because they wanted to have their oil priced in Euros.
T.N.O.
> Depends where you go. I spend time at Otakau Marae and one of my
> flatmates is involved with Maori Women's Welfare and both are involved
> with Kai Tahu Whanau, many of my friends are Maori or Pacific
> Islanders... maybe you need to get out more? BTW, don't forget
> Sukhindar Turner is our Mayor!
I've been there, but dont hang out there as such.
You may know my brother in law Phil Hemopo, and my sister Margeret...
It is still very white down there, well, compared to Dorkland anyway
David Bisman
> "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > > > Yes, Russia has long been a place that cherished the arts and,
> during
> the
> > > > > Soviet era it was one of the things, if no the thing, that they did
> best.
> > > >
> > > > They delivered art well but waht they did best was public transport
> > > > (and murder). However they didn't contribute to art - largely because
> > > > the state handout was accompanied by the state jackboot.
> > > >
> > > I'm no commie, but you seem to have a rather powerful antipathy to
> something
> > > that has been dead and buried for some time now!
> >
> > Yeah. I just can't seem to look back without rancour at a regime that
> > murdered millions, how unreasonable of me.
> >
> So, how do you feel about the US regime that has murdered over half a
> million children in Iraq in just the last ten years - to mention only one of
> its many atrocities?
As soon as anybody comes up with credible evidence that the US has
murdered a single child in Iraq in last ten years I'll feel something
other than contempt for the pawns of the anti-US propagandists who
repeat this claptrap.
> > > The Moscow underground is also an artwork in itself - at least every
> station
> > > is magnificently designed.
> >
> > Most were made from existing works of art that were stolen and
> > vandalised for the project.
> >
> Do you have evidence for that?
It was discussed openly by my Soviet minders whenever I was in
Moscow... but try this site: http://www.metro.ru/
Peter H.M. Brooks
would believe any evidence that disturbs them. However, just in case, have a
look at:
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/320/7236/722?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESU
LTFORMAT=&fulltext=iraq&searchid=1036648107247_20208&stored_search=&FIRSTIND
EX=0&resourcetype=1,2,3,4,10
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/318/7177/203?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESU
LTFORMAT=&fulltext=iraq&searchid=1036648107247_20208&stored_search=&FIRSTIND
EX=0&resourcetype=1,2,3,4,10
http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/313/7070/1474?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RES
ULTFORMAT=&fulltext=iraq&searchid=1036648107247_20208&stored_search=&FIRSTIN
DEX=0&resourcetype=1,2,3,4,10
The British Medical Journal is one of the most respectable sources of
information in the world - but there are none so blind as those who will not
see.
David Pears
<pe...@new.co.za> wrote:
>> >So, how do you feel about the US regime that has murdered over half a
>> >million children in Iraq in just the last ten years - to mention only one
>of
>> >its many atrocities?
>>
>> Er, if you're talking about the sanctions then they're UN sanctions.
>> Why blame the US and not the other UN member countries who are
>> supporting them. Like NZ for instance? Has NZ murdered over half a
>> million children in Iraq in just the last ten years?
>>
>It's a rather sick joke to call them 'UN' sanctions. They are exclusively
>enforced by the US and UK and are part of the war of terror against the
>Iraqi people because they wanted to have their oil priced in Euros.
The euro has been around for only a few years, while the sanctions
have been in place since 1991. And if you think only the US and UK are
enforcing them, then try and export some machine tools to Iraq from NZ
and see what happens. So NZ must also be angry about the Iraqi people
wanting to price their oil in euros, altho I have no idea why since
the euro is convertible with all other currencies so it makes bugger
all difference anyway.
David
David Bisman
The BMJ is a credible and respected source of *MEDICAL* information,
not anything else. I am not going to believe their politics or
geography or astronomy or theology or sociology or whatever just
because their medicine is good, that would be silly.
Peter H.M. Brooks
> > information in the world - but there are none so blind as those who will
not
> > see.
>
> The BMJ is a credible and respected source of *MEDICAL* information,
> not anything else. I am not going to believe their politics or
> geography or astronomy or theology or sociology or whatever just
> because their medicine is good, that would be silly.
>
medical information.
No matter, Dave, you have proved yourself an unreconstructed bigot - but you
probably can't help it!
I won't recommend a course in philosophy it would be unkind to commend
something to you that would make your head hurt.
David Bisman
Stalin created a "famine" that killed 30 million (Mao created a
similar one twenty years later) and, while I have heard the
anti-American mantra about Iraqi dead I have heard no-one until you
suggest that we are talking about child deaths in excess of the
population of the entire country! BTW, the sanctions are not criminal
(they are pursuant to UN resolutions) nor American (they are pursuant
to UN resolutions).
> As many as the criminal spraying of defoliants by american troops on
> North Vietnam which resulted in thousands of innocent people, to say
> nothing of eventually losing the war and having to retreat with
> their tails between their legs.
> Imagine that, being beaten by some "gooks".
Actually, the use of defoliants was not criminal at that time. The
rules of war still allow for them in certain cases. And the side
effects of 24D and 245E were unknown at the time (they were freely
available in the stores here in NZ and were often mixed by gardeners
making small quantities of "Agent Orange" in our own back yards). And
I have no need to imagine the Vietnamese winning that war, I remember
it well. In fact the only war the US actually won in the 20th Century
was against the Carribean nation of Grenada! As to the "gooks"
remark... you have been watching too many b-grade war movies.
> >> The Moscow underground is also an artwork in itself - at least every station
> >> is magnificently designed.
> >
> >Most were made from existing works of art that were stolen and
> >vandalised for the project.
>
> Even though the vast majority of subway art was commissioned for the
> purpose. Get your facts correct sunshine.
Let's get this straight - most of the stations were made from looted
Czarist era artworks - the others were decorated with Soviet Realism
style art that was commissioned for the purpose. I haven't been in
Moscow since 1986 and I know that the building programme has continued
with new lines and stations opened in 1999 and 2001 so the ratio might
have changed by now - the style probably has also.
Peter H.M. Brooks
"David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> similar one twenty years later) and, while I have heard the
> anti-American mantra about Iraqi dead I have heard no-one until you
> suggest that we are talking about child deaths in excess of the
> population of the entire country!
>
It's unfortunate when you find yourself lying to try to shore up your
claims, it should really give you pause for thought that maybe you are
wrong.
The factbook on the internet gives the Iraqi Population 22,675,617 (July
2000 est.). The BMJ, if you read it, will show you that over half a million
Iraqi children have been killed by the US/UK imposed sanctions.
David Bisman
> "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > The British Medical Journal is one of the most respectable sources of
> > > information in the world - but there are none so blind as those who will
> not
> > > see.
> >
> > The BMJ is a credible and respected source of *MEDICAL* information,
> > not anything else. I am not going to believe their politics or
> > geography or astronomy or theology or sociology or whatever just
> > because their medicine is good, that would be silly.
> >
> LOL! If you looked at the articles you would have seen that they contained
> medical information.
Exactly - so what was your point?
> No matter, Dave, you have proved yourself an unreconstructed bigot - but you
> probably can't help it!
How is it bogotry to seek medical information from a medical journal?
> I won't recommend a course in philosophy it would be unkind to commend
> something to you that would make your head hurt.
I enjoy philosophy very much and spend a great deal of time with
philosophy academics and philosophers (I got an A in the last
philosophy course I took).
Peter H.M. Brooks
> "Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@new.co.za> wrote in message
news:<aqeo2n$jd8$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>...
> > "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > The British Medical Journal is one of the most respectable sources
of
> > > > information in the world - but there are none so blind as those who
will
> > not
> > > > see.
> > >
> > > The BMJ is a credible and respected source of *MEDICAL* information,
> > > not anything else. I am not going to believe their politics or
> > > geography or astronomy or theology or sociology or whatever just
> > > because their medicine is good, that would be silly.
> > >
> > LOL! If you looked at the articles you would have seen that they
contained
> > medical information.
>
> Exactly - so what was your point?
>
of half a million Iraqi children by the US/UK sanctions has been a medical
emergency - hence its reporting in the BMJ.
>
> > I won't recommend a course in philosophy it would be unkind to commend
> > something to you that would make your head hurt.
>
> I enjoy philosophy very much and spend a great deal of time with
> philosophy academics and philosophers (I got an A in the last
> philosophy course I took).
>
David Pears
<pe...@new.co.za> wrote:
>> Exactly - so what was your point?
>>
>Sorry, I hadn't realised your attention span was quite so short. The killing
>of half a million Iraqi children by the US/UK sanctions has been a medical
>emergency - hence its reporting in the BMJ.
Since the BMJ is dabbling in politics, do they call them "US/UK
sanctions", or UN sanctions? And do they attribute the blame to
Saddam Hussein for not holding up his treaty obligations under the NPT
or the ceasefire that ended the Gulf War, or is it entirely the fault
of the US and the UK? How many deaths do the BMJ list as being caused
by use of chemical weapons, either in northern Iraq against Kurds, or
against Iranians in the Iran-Iraq war? Do they have statistics for
the medical implications of torture in Iraq, perhaps a graph showing
victims each year and the severity of their injuries? What do they
say about the medical consequences of running dodgy nuclear, chemical,
and biologic weapons development programs? And lastly, what are the
health effects of setting on fire a whole country full of oil wells?
David
David Bisman
> "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d7d9f309.02110...@posting.google.com...
> > "Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@new.co.za> wrote in message
> news:<aqeo2n$jd8$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>...
> > > "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > The British Medical Journal is one of the most respectable sources
> of
> > > > > information in the world - but there are none so blind as those who
> will
> not
> > > > > see.
> > > >
> > > > The BMJ is a credible and respected source of *MEDICAL* information,
> > > > not anything else. I am not going to believe their politics or
> > > > geography or astronomy or theology or sociology or whatever just
> > > > because their medicine is good, that would be silly.
> > > >
> > > LOL! If you looked at the articles you would have seen that they
> contained
> > > medical information.
> >
> > Exactly - so what was your point?
> >
> Sorry, I hadn't realised your attention span was quite so short. The killing
> of half a million Iraqi children by the US/UK sanctions has been a medical
> emergency - hence its reporting in the BMJ.
Since that is a political position I shan't take the BMJ's word for
it. You see the sanctions (UN rather than US/UK BTW) specifically
exempt food and medicine then the BMJ is 100% wrong in asserting that
the observed deaths and illnesses are a direct result of these
sanctions or are exacerbated by them. Saddam Hussein is a man who
thinks nothing of using poison gas against his own citizens, is a man
who has murdered fifty-four members of his own extended family, is a
man who happily invaded his neighbour and who, in retreat, set fire to
its oil wells. Clearly he is happy to withold foood and medicine from
his own people so that their agonising deaths can be used to
flagellate the West and clearly the liberals in the West are his
willing partners. I noted that the first article you cited quoted John
Pilger which shows what little credibility the whole thing has.
> > > I won't recommend a course in philosophy it would be unkind to commend
> > > something to you that would make your head hurt.
> >
> > I enjoy philosophy very much and spend a great deal of time with
> > philosophy academics and philosophers (I got an A in the last
> > philosophy course I took).
> >
> Oh, dear. I think you should ask them for your money back.
On what grounds?
Peter H.M. Brooks
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2002 15:34:24 +0200, "Peter H.M. Brooks"
> <pe...@new.co.za> wrote:
>
> >> Exactly - so what was your point?
> >>
> >Sorry, I hadn't realised your attention span was quite so short. The
killing
> >of half a million Iraqi children by the US/UK sanctions has been a
medical
> >emergency - hence its reporting in the BMJ.
>
> Since the BMJ is dabbling in politics, do they call them "US/UK
> sanctions", or UN sanctions?
>
the deliberate murder of half a million children in a poor country by rich
ones 'dabbling in politics' is simply nonsense.
Peter H.M. Brooks
killing
> > of half a million Iraqi children by the US/UK sanctions has been a
medical
> > emergency - hence its reporting in the BMJ.
>
> Since that is a political position I shan't take the BMJ's word for
> it. You see the sanctions (UN rather than US/UK BTW) specifically
> exempt food and medicine then the BMJ is 100% wrong in asserting that
> the observed deaths and illnesses are a direct result of these
> sanctions or are exacerbated by them.
>
the old and infirm that had been caused by the sanctions! The 'exclusions'
are proof that those imposing the sanctions knew exactly the toll in human
life that they were extracting and establishes their culpability.
Nobody is denying that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein is indeed a nasty
piece of work who has done many evil things. The sanctions have had no
effect, as usual with sanctions, on him or his regime. They have, however
had a lethal effect in the innocent. This may well have been exacibated by
Hussein, but it doesn't excuse the wrong.
If you don't know somebody is a mad axeman and you sell him an axe, then you
are not responsible for the resulting deaths. However, if you do know
somebody is a mad axeman and, year after year, you continue to sell him new
axes and ignore the reports of the carnage, then you are an accessory to
murder and as culpable as the axeman himself - more so, in fact, as the
axeman is mad and you may not be.
So, if you have had any value from your philosophy courses, consider the
moral point made in the above paragraph, then consider how the US and UK
have continued for over ten years to forcibly apply sanctions (and bomb
people in Iraq every week of these years) knowing, certainly after the first
two years, that the only effect that the sanctions were having was to kill
the weak.
David Bisman
> "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > similar one twenty years later) and, while I have heard the
> > anti-American mantra about Iraqi dead I have heard no-one until you
> > suggest that we are talking about child deaths in excess of the
> > population of the entire country!
> >
> It's unfortunate when you find yourself lying to try to shore up your
> claims, it should really give you pause for thought that maybe you are
> wrong.
I have heard so many numbers in this debate that I don't know which
one you perceive as real... John Pilger's "over 1 million"?, Robert
Fisk's "in excess of 3 million"?, or Noam Chomsky's "untold millions?
> The factbook on the internet gives the Iraqi Population 22,675,617 (July
> 2000 est.). The BMJ, if you read it, will show you that over half a million
> Iraqi children have been killed by the US/UK imposed sanctions.
As there are no US/UK imposed sanctions but only UN sanctions
(unanimously imposed) and since these specifically exempt medical
supplies and food then, if there is any lying going on here it
certainly isn't coming from me.
Peter H Metcalfe
> Nobody is denying that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
Free Clue: the CIA did not install Saddam Hussein.
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H.M. Brooks
> "Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@new.co.za> wrote in message
news:<aqfh5e$pod$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>...
> > "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > similar one twenty years later) and, while I have heard the
> > > anti-American mantra about Iraqi dead I have heard no-one until you
> > > suggest that we are talking about child deaths in excess of the
> > > population of the entire country!
> > >
> > It's unfortunate when you find yourself lying to try to shore up your
> > claims, it should really give you pause for thought that maybe you are
> > wrong.
>
> I have heard so many numbers in this debate that I don't know which
> one you perceive as real... John Pilger's "over 1 million"?, Robert
> Fisk's "in excess of 3 million"?, or Noam Chomsky's "untold millions?
>
when you said that you had heard 'no-one until you' making this claim. This
was simply untrue.
As to what various commentators have to say about this atrocity, I take the
figures the BMJ has provided as most likely to be correct. Three years ago,
these put it at over 500,000 children.
Peter H.M. Brooks
"Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.183767989...@news.qsi.net.nz...
> In article <aqi0uc$90o$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
>
> > Nobody is denying that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
>
> Free Clue: the CIA did not install Saddam Hussein.
>
Look at: http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/saddam.htm
Peter H Metcalfe
>
> "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.183767989...@news.qsi.net.nz...
> > In article <aqi0uc$90o$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
> > > Nobody is denying that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
> > Free Clue: the CIA did not install Saddam Hussein.
> 'Free' often, as in this case, gives poor value!
> Look at: http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/saddam.htm
All I see there is a book review claiming that the CIA overthrew
Qassim's regime in 1963 and quotes some people without giving any
indication of where they said it (a poor sign).
For your information, the 1963 Ba'athist regime was ousted within
the same year by Abdel Salaam Arif. Saddam himself was not in
power until he became vice-president in the Ba'athist coup of
1968 under President al-Bakr.
So your link does not show that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
and you don't know shit but simply regurgitate any old garbage. In
earlier times, your ilk would have been quoting from the Protocols
of the Elders of Zion.
--Peter Metcalfe
Gnomon
<metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote
>In article <aqi7kt$mmg$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
>>
>> "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.183767989...@news.qsi.net.nz...
>> > In article <aqi0uc$90o$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
>
>> > > Nobody is denying that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
>
>> > Free Clue: the CIA did not install Saddam Hussein.
>
>> 'Free' often, as in this case, gives poor value!
>
>> Look at: http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/saddam.htm
>
>All I see there is a book review claiming that the CIA overthrew
>Qassim's regime in 1963 and quotes some people without giving any
>indication of where they said it (a poor sign).
>
>For your information, the 1963 Ba'athist regime was ousted within
>the same year by Abdel Salaam Arif. Saddam himself was not in
>power until he became vice-president in the Ba'athist coup of
>1968 under President al-Bakr.
With the support and money of the CIA.
>So your link does not show that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
>and you don't know shit but simply regurgitate any old garbage. In
>earlier times, your ilk would have been quoting from the Protocols
>of the Elders of Zion.
Ah, so you resort to calling him a jewish consiracy theorist.
It isn't too far from invoking godwins law.
Peter H.M. Brooks
> the same year by Abdel Salaam Arif. Saddam himself was not in
> power until he became vice-president in the Ba'athist coup of
> 1968 under President al-Bakr.
>
trips to the US Embassy in Cairo during his exile there? Was he just going
for tea?
Peter H.M. Brooks
> On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 19:33:06 +1300, Peter H Metcalfe
> <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote
>
> >In article <aqi7kt$mmg$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
> >>
> >> "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> >> news:MPG.183767989...@news.qsi.net.nz...
> >> > In article <aqi0uc$90o$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
> >
> >> > > Nobody is denying that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
> >
> >> > Free Clue: the CIA did not install Saddam Hussein.
> >
> >> 'Free' often, as in this case, gives poor value!
> >
> >> Look at: http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/saddam.htm
> >
> >All I see there is a book review claiming that the CIA overthrew
> >Qassim's regime in 1963 and quotes some people without giving any
> >indication of where they said it (a poor sign).
> >
> >For your information, the 1963 Ba'athist regime was ousted within
> >the same year by Abdel Salaam Arif. Saddam himself was not in
> >power until he became vice-president in the Ba'athist coup of
> >1968 under President al-Bakr.
>
> With the support and money of the CIA.
>
>
> >So your link does not show that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
> >and you don't know shit but simply regurgitate any old garbage. In
> >earlier times, your ilk would have been quoting from the Protocols
> >of the Elders of Zion.
>
> Ah, so you resort to calling him a jewish consiracy theorist.
> It isn't too far from invoking godwins law.
>
David Pears
<pe...@new.co.za> wrote:
>> >Sorry, I hadn't realised your attention span was quite so short. The
>killing
>> >of half a million Iraqi children by the US/UK sanctions has been a
>medical
>> >emergency - hence its reporting in the BMJ.
>>
>> Since the BMJ is dabbling in politics, do they call them "US/UK
>> sanctions", or UN sanctions?
>>
>The point is that they are not 'dabbling in politics'. To call mentioning
>the deliberate murder of half a million children in a poor country by rich
>ones 'dabbling in politics' is simply nonsense.
The only deliberate murder is by Saddam Hussein. So why do you keep
referring to the UN sanctions as US/UK sanctions? And surely the BMJ
must have taken in to effect the health effects of all the other
Saddam created health risks that you snipped from my post, otherwise
how could they tell if the deaths were due to Saddam not feeding them,
or due to torture, burning oil wells, and badly managed chemical
weapons factories? Surely they commented on these externalities in
their report.
But given the death of all these children because Saddam is refusing
to feed them as he holds them hostage in order to get the UN sanctions
removed... will you be supporting the US invading the place to get rid
of the evil little dictator?
David
Peter H Metcalfe
> > For your information, the 1963 Ba'athist regime was ousted within
> > the same year by Abdel Salaam Arif. Saddam himself was not in
> > power until he became vice-president in the Ba'athist coup of
> > 1968 under President al-Bakr.
> All well and good. How, though, do you account for Mr Hussein's frequent
> trips to the US Embassy in Cairo during his exile there? Was he just going
> for tea?
Even if true (noting the conspicious lack of documentation), why should
I have to "account for" it? You are the one making the bullshit claim
that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein and have nothing to show for it.
Going by your low standards of evidence and logic, one could point to
your frequent posts to usenet as evidence of criminal acts for as
everybody knows such acts have planned over the internet.
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H Metcalfe
gno...@obelisk.com says...
> >For your information, the 1963 Ba'athist regime was ousted within
> >the same year by Abdel Salaam Arif. Saddam himself was not in
> >power until he became vice-president in the Ba'athist coup of
> >1968 under President al-Bakr.
> With the support and money of the CIA.
Evidence?
> >So your link does not show that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
> >and you don't know shit but simply regurgitate any old garbage. In
> >earlier times, your ilk would have been quoting from the Protocols
> >of the Elders of Zion.
> Ah, so you resort to calling him a jewish consiracy theorist.
Wrong.
> It isn't too far from invoking godwins law.
But it's too far for you to learn how to construct a logical
argument.
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H Metcalfe
>
> "Gnomon" <gno...@obelisk.com> wrote in message
> news:o0hpsuofnfv4glmat...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 19:33:06 +1300, Peter H Metcalfe
> > <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote
> >
> > >In article <aqi7kt$mmg$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
> > >>
> > >> "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:MPG.183767989...@news.qsi.net.nz...
> > >> > In article <aqi0uc$90o$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
> > >
> > >> > > Nobody is denying that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
> > >
> > >> > Free Clue: the CIA did not install Saddam Hussein.
> > >
> > >> 'Free' often, as in this case, gives poor value!
> > >
> > >> Look at: http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/saddam.htm
> > >
> > >All I see there is a book review claiming that the CIA overthrew
> > >Qassim's regime in 1963 and quotes some people without giving any
> > >indication of where they said it (a poor sign).
> > >
> > >For your information, the 1963 Ba'athist regime was ousted within
> > >the same year by Abdel Salaam Arif. Saddam himself was not in
> > >power until he became vice-president in the Ba'athist coup of
> > >1968 under President al-Bakr.
> > With the support and money of the CIA.
> And the lists of people the CIA wanted him to eliminate - as he did.
Evidence? All you have is a book review talking about the events
in 1963 and which says nothing about the events of 1968 of which
you were well and truly ignorant of until I pointed it out to you.
> > >So your link does not show that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
> > >and you don't know shit but simply regurgitate any old garbage. In
> > >earlier times, your ilk would have been quoting from the Protocols
> > >of the Elders of Zion.
> > Ah, so you resort to calling him a jewish consiracy theorist.
> > It isn't too far from invoking godwins law.
> It is, isn't it!
Evidence of his and your stupidity? I quite agree.
--Peter Metcalfe
David Bisman
> "David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > >
> > > Sorry, I hadn't realised your attention span was quite so short. The
> killing
> > > of half a million Iraqi children by the US/UK sanctions has been a
> medical
> > > emergency - hence its reporting in the BMJ.
> >
> > Since that is a political position I shan't take the BMJ's word for
> > it. You see the sanctions (UN rather than US/UK BTW) specifically
> > exempt food and medicine then the BMJ is 100% wrong in asserting that
> > the observed deaths and illnesses are a direct result of these
> > sanctions or are exacerbated by them.
> >
> The exclusion was only added after protest at the mass deaths of children,
> the old and infirm that had been caused by the sanctions! The 'exclusions'
> are proof that those imposing the sanctions knew exactly the toll in human
> life that they were extracting and establishes their culpability.
You are incorrect, the original sanctions always allowed Iraq the
ability to sell a certain amount of oil for food and medicine. Later,
the amount was increased - this was done at the request of the United
States.
> Nobody is denying that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein is indeed a nasty
> piece of work who has done many evil things. The sanctions have had no
> effect, as usual with sanctions, on him or his regime. They have, however
> had a lethal effect in the innocent. This may well have been exacibated by
> Hussein, but it doesn't excuse the wrong.
What evidence do you have for this fantasy that Saddam Hussein was
installed by the CIA? Sanctions do indeed work, when applied with a
will (cf. South Africa) and, once again, I repeat, the sanctions are
specifically designed not to hurt the innocent, the suffering seen is
the exclusive fault of the regime that the sanctions are designed to
keep in check. It is precisely because of that that I am forced to
agree with the current US policy of regime change.
> If you don't know somebody is a mad axeman and you sell him an axe, then you
> are not responsible for the resulting deaths. However, if you do know
> somebody is a mad axeman and, year after year, you continue to sell him new
> axes and ignore the reports of the carnage, then you are an accessory to
> murder and as culpable as the axeman himself - more so, in fact, as the
> axeman is mad and you may not be.
A rather self serving approach to a moral philosophy (and one
dimensional to boot).
> So, if you have had any value from your philosophy courses, consider the
> moral point made in the above paragraph, then consider how the US and UK
> have continued for over ten years to forcibly apply sanctions (and bomb
> people in Iraq every week of these years) knowing, certainly after the first
> two years, that the only effect that the sanctions were having was to kill
> the weak.
The sanctions are UN sanctions, NOT US and/or UK sanctions.
The real moral equivalent of this would be if that same axe murderer
held a building full of hostages and the police had the building
surrounded. Suppose the police sent in food and medicine for the
wounded but the axeman ate all the food himself and refused to let the
hostages take the medicine. Now suppose he killed or injured some of
the hostages every once and a while and outside the bleeding heart
liberals (like you) started bleating, "it is all the fault of the
police, if they would just stop the seige and let the guy go
everything would be all right. Every hostage that dies does so because
of the police action". Meanwhile, the police have decided it is time
to act, they have given the axeman an ultimatum, either he releases
the hostages or they will storm the building and free them.
That's how I see things and, BTW, I am 100% on the side of the police.
Gnomon
<metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote
>In article <o0hpsuofnfv4glmat...@4ax.com>,
>gno...@obelisk.com says...
>> On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 19:33:06 +1300, Peter H Metcalfe
>> <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote
>
>> >For your information, the 1963 Ba'athist regime was ousted within
>> >the same year by Abdel Salaam Arif. Saddam himself was not in
>> >power until he became vice-president in the Ba'athist coup of
>> >1968 under President al-Bakr.
>
>> With the support and money of the CIA.
>
>Evidence?
>
>> >So your link does not show that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
>> >and you don't know shit but simply regurgitate any old garbage. In
>> >earlier times, your ilk would have been quoting from the Protocols
>> >of the Elders of Zion.
>
>> Ah, so you resort to calling him a jewish consiracy theorist.
>
>Wrong.
I hzave been watching you for a while, whenever you are challenged
you begin a personal attack and try and divert attention by calling
for unproduceable evidence. Of course we can't find written or
documentary evidence from the CIA instructing Hussein to get rid of
various people, they are too clever for that. It still doesn't mean
that it once existed. I don't think you can use that fact of your
correctness.
>
>> It isn't too far from invoking godwins law.
>
>But it's too far for you to learn how to construct a logical
>argument.
And here we go again, you attempt to divert attention from the topic
by attacking people.
Peter H.M. Brooks
> On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 05:47:27 +0200, "Peter H.M. Brooks"
> <pe...@new.co.za> wrote:
>
> >> >Sorry, I hadn't realised your attention span was quite so short. The
> >killing
> >> >of half a million Iraqi children by the US/UK sanctions has been a
> >medical
> >> >emergency - hence its reporting in the BMJ.
> >>
> >> Since the BMJ is dabbling in politics, do they call them "US/UK
> >> sanctions", or UN sanctions?
> >>
> >The point is that they are not 'dabbling in politics'. To call mentioning
> >the deliberate murder of half a million children in a poor country by
rich
> >ones 'dabbling in politics' is simply nonsense.
>
> The only deliberate murder is by Saddam Hussein. So why do you keep
> referring to the UN sanctions as US/UK sanctions? And surely the BMJ
> must have taken in to effect the health effects of all the other
> Saddam created health risks that you snipped from my post, otherwise
> how could they tell if the deaths were due to Saddam not feeding them,
> or due to torture, burning oil wells, and badly managed chemical
> weapons factories? Surely they commented on these externalities in
> their report.
>
I say probably in vain because it is pretty clear to me that you are
racist who couldn't give a shit about half a million chidren - unless one of
them was yours.
I think it pretty pathetic that you are so xenophobic, but it is your
problem to live with yourself, not mine.
Peter H.M. Brooks
> In article <aqigaq$gdd$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
>
> > "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>
> > > For your information, the 1963 Ba'athist regime was ousted within
> > > the same year by Abdel Salaam Arif. Saddam himself was not in
> > > power until he became vice-president in the Ba'athist coup of
> > > 1968 under President al-Bakr.
>
> > All well and good. How, though, do you account for Mr Hussein's frequent
> > trips to the US Embassy in Cairo during his exile there? Was he just
going
> > for tea?
>
> Even if true
>
foreign, after all.
Why should you care?
Actually, even if you did give a shit about the atrocity you probably
couldn't do anything about it, so your opinion matters less than a fart.
Peter H.M. Brooks
"Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>
> > >So your link does not show that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
> > >and you don't know shit but simply regurgitate any old garbage. In
> > >earlier times, your ilk would have been quoting from the Protocols
> > >of the Elders of Zion.
>
> > Ah, so you resort to calling him a jewish consiracy theorist.
>
> Wrong.
>
wrong.
I think it is useful to see what side the liars are on.
Peter H.M. Brooks
>
> I hzave been watching you for a while, whenever you are challenged
> you begin a personal attack and try and divert attention by calling
> for unproduceable evidence. Of course we can't find written or
> documentary evidence from the CIA instructing Hussein to get rid of
> various people, they are too clever for that. It still doesn't mean
> that it once existed. I don't think you can use that fact of your
> correctness.
> >
to support the US are quite happy to lie and dissemble.
If the US has to rely on liars, maybe those who are not bigots and already
decided can learn.
I'm sure that Caligula also had his toadies.
Peter H.M. Brooks
you
> > are not responsible for the resulting deaths. However, if you do know
> > somebody is a mad axeman and, year after year, you continue to sell him
new
> > axes and ignore the reports of the carnage, then you are an accessory to
> > murder and as culpable as the axeman himself - more so, in fact, as the
> > axeman is mad and you may not be.
>
> A rather self serving approach to a moral philosophy (and one
> dimensional to boot).
>
himself without an agreement!
Go and ask for your money back - you didn't understand my point before (no
fault on your side), just present this posting and they will refund you -
you clearly haven't learned any philosophy.
Don't take no for an answer, either, insist on a full refund on the grounds
(just show them this posting, don't try to understand what 'on the grounds'
means) that you couldn't understand a philosophical idea if it hit you in
the goolies.
I'm sure you are really a very nice chap, Dave, and I don't hold your
stupidity against you. But I do suggest that, after getting your money back
you restrict argument to that that you have with your dog - that is, after
all, what dogs are there for, to be nice to chap like you.
Love and kisses,
Peter
Peter H Metcalfe
> On Sat, 9 Nov 2002 23:04:40 +1300, Peter H Metcalfe
> <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote
>
> >In article <o0hpsuofnfv4glmat...@4ax.com>,
> >gno...@obelisk.com says...
> >Wrong.
> I hzave been watching you for a while, whenever you are challenged
> you begin a personal attack and try and divert attention by calling
> for unproduceable evidence.
If the evidence is unproducable then how do you know that the CIA
installed Saddam Hussein?
> >But it's too far for you to learn how to construct a logical
> >argument.
> And here we go again, you attempt to divert attention from the topic
> by attacking people.
Really? Then you could best disprove the personal attack by
constructing a logical argument from the available evidence
that Saddam Hussein was installed by the CIA.
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H Metcalfe
>
> "Gnomon" <gno...@obelisk.com> wrote in message
> > >Wrong.
> >
> > I hzave been watching you for a while, whenever you are challenged
> > you begin a personal attack and try and divert attention by calling
> > for unproduceable evidence. Of course we can't find written or
> > documentary evidence from the CIA instructing Hussein to get rid of
> > various people, they are too clever for that. It still doesn't mean
> > that it once existed. I don't think you can use that fact of your
> > correctness.
> Maybe the rest of us observers can learn something from this. Those who
> seek to support the US are quite happy to lie and dissemble.
> If the US has to rely on liars, maybe those who are not bigots and
> already decided can learn.
> I'm sure that Caligula also had his toadies.
Amazing. Having produced no evidence whatsoever for an assertion
of his, he now pretends that I am quite happy to lie and dissemble,
am a bigot and "already decided". But wouldn't that be what Gnomon
was criticizing me for? Making a personal attack and trying to
divert the topic?
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H Metcalfe
>
> "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1837a44f...@news.qsi.net.nz...
> > In article <aqigaq$gdd$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
> > > All well and good. How, though, do you account for Mr Hussein's frequent
> > > trips to the US Embassy in Cairo during his exile there? Was he just
> > > going for tea?
> > Even if true
> Indeed. Even if true, the dead children don't matter to you - they are
> foreign, after all.
Your lack of evidence to show that Saddam Hussein was installed by
the CIA and subsequent attempt to attack me by pretending that I
don't care about Iraqi dead children is duely noted. Any other
person with a shred of intellectual honesty would have admitted
error, but you cannot.
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H Metcalfe
>
> "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > >So your link does not show that the CIA installed Saddam Hussein
> > > >and you don't know shit but simply regurgitate any old garbage. In
> > > >earlier times, your ilk would have been quoting from the Protocols
> > > >of the Elders of Zion.
> > > Ah, so you resort to calling him a jewish consiracy theorist.
> > Wrong.
> Exactly. You lie. You made the clear accusation and now you say it was
> wrong.
Wrong. I did not call you a jewish conspiracy theorist, I merely
said that you display the same lack of logic as those type of
people. Which is true then and now.
> I think it is useful to see what side the liars are on.
Your side apparently.
--Peter Metcalfe
Sue Bilstein
news:aqjp4v$10a$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
>
> "David Pears" <dpears...@bigfoot.com.au> wrote in message
> news:04mpsuk7pk5fbtol8...@4ax.com...
> >
> > referring to the UN sanctions as US/UK sanctions? And surely the BMJ
> > must have taken in to effect the health effects of all the other
> > Saddam created health risks that you snipped from my post, otherwise
> > how could they tell if the deaths were due to Saddam not feeding them,
> > or due to torture, burning oil wells, and badly managed chemical
> > weapons factories? Surely they commented on these externalities in
> > their report.
> >
> I'm waiting, probably in vain, for you to read the references.
>
> I say probably in vain because it is pretty clear to me that you are
> racist who couldn't give a shit about half a million chidren - unless one
of
> them was yours.
>
> I think it pretty pathetic that you are so xenophobic, but it is your
> problem to live with yourself, not mine.
>
It really does look like nobody has read Peter Brooks' BMJ references. All
three are pure opinion pieces, with the opinion-holder's mind firmly
cemented on Peter's side of the question. No medical research whatever.
John Cawston
Anyone reading such a doleful litany could only wonder why and how this
dictator continues to defy the world and holds his people hostage to his power
and ambitions.
JC
Peter H.M. Brooks
"Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>
> Amazing. Having produced no evidence whatsoever for an assertion
> of his, he now pretends that I am quite happy to lie and dissemble,
> am a bigot and "already decided". But wouldn't that be what Gnomon
> was criticizing me for? Making a personal attack and trying to
> divert the topic?
>
happy with untruth, so pointing it out isn't an attack.
Peter H.M. Brooks
> In article <aqjp9d$1hh$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
> >
> > "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.1837a44f...@news.qsi.net.nz...
> > > In article <aqigaq$gdd$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
>
> > > > All well and good. How, though, do you account for Mr Hussein's
frequent
> > > > trips to the US Embassy in Cairo during his exile there? Was he just
> > > > going for tea?
>
> > > Even if true
>
> > Indeed. Even if true, the dead children don't matter to you - they are
> > foreign, after all.
>
> Your lack of evidence to show that Saddam Hussein was installed by
> the CIA and subsequent attempt to attack me by pretending that I
> don't care about Iraqi dead children is duely noted.
>
children murdered by the US, are you?
Peter H.M. Brooks
"John Cawston" <rewa...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
>
> Anyone reading such a doleful litany could only wonder why and how this
> dictator continues to defy the world and holds his people hostage to his
power
> and ambitions.
>
been picked on by the world's bully is that it has oil. For the bully to
then claim some sort of legitimacy for it's murderous self-interest is
Orwellian in the extreme - what is remarkable is that people should believe
it.
Peter H Metcalfe
> > Amazing. Having produced no evidence whatsoever for an assertion
> > of his, he now pretends that I am quite happy to lie and dissemble,
> > am a bigot and "already decided". But wouldn't that be what Gnomon
> > was criticizing me for? Making a personal attack and trying to
> > divert the topic?
> Nothing personal, and no attack.
You've now stooped to telling lies.
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H Metcalfe
> > Your lack of evidence to show that Saddam Hussein was installed by
> > the CIA and subsequent attempt to attack me by pretending that I
> > don't care about Iraqi dead children is duely noted.
> You aren't suddenly claiming that you do care about the half a million
> children murdered by the US, are you?
You aren't suddenly claiming that you are not an apologist for
a bloodthirsty tyrant, are you?
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H.M. Brooks
That is, I suppose, something.
Peter H.M. Brooks
apoligies for their behavior either.
Peter H Metcalfe
> > You aren't suddenly claiming that you are not an apologist for
> > a bloodthirsty tyrant, are you?
> Of course I'm not! I have never supported US aggression, and I offer no
> apoligies for their behavior either.
So it's completely and utterly wrong for the US to do some things but
okay for Saddam to do things that are much much worse?
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H Metcalfe
> > You've now stooped to telling lies.
> I'm glad that you confess to your lies!
I do no such thing. Perhaps you better start attending remedial
reading lessons?
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H.M. Brooks
thread, Saddam Hussein is a very nasty piece of work and has certainly been
guilty of murder, torture and worse, fortunately he acts on a relatively
small stage so is considerably less of a threat to the world than the US,
that has a long history of war crimes, aggression, torture and assasination,
quite apart from causing the death of innocent people by the thousand in
Iraq.
It is possible, when confronted with two evil parties who hate each other to
say a plague on both your houses and take neither side. I know you may find
this a difficult concept to grasp, but, truly, it is possible!
My concern is for the ordinary, decent people whose lives have been blighted
by the US's aggressive persuit of its own economic interests - unlike Saddam
whose evil is circumscribed to a small geographic area, the US has caused
death and misery in dozens of countries - you should know at least some of
the long list over the past sixty years!
Peter H.M. Brooks
accept that others stooped before, by implication, hence my point.
Don't you chaps sleep down there at all?? I'm impressed by your staying
power...
John Cawston
> "John Cawston" <rewa...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
> >
> > Anyone reading such a doleful litany could only wonder why and how this
> > dictator continues to defy the world and holds his people hostage to his
> power
> > and ambitions.
> >
> The world is full of similarly evil people,
Very few if any are dictators of 20 million people.
> the only reason that Iraq has
> been picked on by the world's bully is that it has oil.
Thats an undoubted consideration.
> For the bully to
> then claim some sort of legitimacy for it's murderous self-interest is
> Orwellian in the extreme - what is remarkable is that people should believe
> it.
Why not. Any sensible analysis starts from the first principles of Sadaam's
regime, his penchant for making catastrophic war and desire for weapons of mass
destruction and genocidal tendencies towards Kurds, Shiites and Jews. From there
you move to the fact that the world body (UN) have imposed sanctions to bring
him to heel.
That people have died under his regime and under the sanctions is his fault, not
the UN. That some nations have driven the original Gulf War and sanctions more
aggressively than others is neither here or there. This group of self interested
countries include the US, UK, Australia, NZ, Canada and generally Europe. On the
other side, Russia, France and others have tried to weaken the sanctions, again
because of self interest.
Saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis is a reasonably noble cause
and removing Saddam, Uday and Co is the best way to do it. Given that up to 7-8%
of Iraqis are refugees at any one time they and their long suffering hosts are
likely to support such a removal.
JC
Peter H.M. Brooks
> "Peter H.M. Brooks" wrote:
>
> > "John Cawston" <rewa...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
> > >
> > > Anyone reading such a doleful litany could only wonder why and how
this
> > > dictator continues to defy the world and holds his people hostage to
his
> > power
> > > and ambitions.
> > >
> > The world is full of similarly evil people,
>
> Very few if any are dictators of 20 million people.
>
utilitarian view would consider the fortunes of those oppressed by such
dictators and weight those against the soveignty that protects the
oppressors and, maybe, get rid of some of the dictators - it would, however,
be a consideration that would have to be applied fairly and not for economic
or other reasons - so Zimbabwe would be likely to be a better case for such
intervention than Iraq.
I have been surprised by this thread, though. I thought that Kiwis were
generally quite peacable people and my innocently making a suggestion of how
to deal with graffiti constructively, rather than being more draconian
against the perpetrators, seems to have turned into a thread urging bloody
invasions of sovereign countries. Peculiar, I'd say!
David Bisman
good at them. However, the point remains that you are an apologist for
a murderous tyrant and are opposed to those who are on the dise of
freedom for the people of Iraq and that you have posted Op.Ed pieces
from the BMJ that contain a lot of politics and zero medical research
and that you consistently lie in calling the UN sanctions
(administered, as per the Security Council resolution, by Norway)
US/UK sanctions and that you have declared that the US/UK has been
responsible for 500,000 child deaths in Iraq and have provided no
evidence whatsoever for even one death. If you would care to discuss
the facts at any time please feel free to start.
Cheers
David Bisman
Dunedin
New Zealand
Peter H Metcalfe
> > I do no such thing. Perhaps you better start attending remedial
> > reading lessons?
> Saying 'you've now stooped' in the context of the discussion, indicates
> you accept that others stooped before, by implication, hence my point.
Wrong. It meant that you started out with deranged fantasies
(Saddam was installed by the CIA), went on to bogus evidence
(using a book review about a coup that had nothing with the
events in which Saddam took power) and have now stooped to
telling lies. In other words, your debating style has been
one of systematic degradation in intellectual honesty and
logic.
--Peter Metcalfe
Peter H.M. Brooks
"David Bisman" <dbi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> Ok, I already understand ad hominem arguments.
>
Sorry, Dave, but they weren't ad hominem! You claimed an interest in, and
some aquaintance with, philosophy. The mad axeman point is an important one
in considering moral culpability. I had hoped that you would at least make
some stab at understanding it. That you failed to is evidence of your
bigotry in this matter - that isn't ad hominem, simply factual. You can't
engage in a discussion, but only re-state your erroneous position.
I fear that you can't even distinguish between concern for people and
support for their ruler - quite an easy concept for most people to grasp!
So, Dave, sorry to have caused you upset, it was cruel of me to expect too
much from you.
Peter H Metcalfe
> > So it's completely and utterly wrong for the US to do some things but
> > okay for Saddam to do things that are much much worse?
> I think you've missed the point somewhere.
I have missed nothing. I notice that you haven't even tried to deny
outright what I just said. Your tedious waffling self-justification
of your bankrupt ethics that follows only confirms my belief.
After all, you think that nothing should be done about Saddam because
he only affects a small stage! The last time I've heard a similar
sentiment was when Stalin said "one death is a tragedy, ten million
a statistic".
--Peter Metcalfe
David Pears
<pe...@new.co.za> wrote:
>> >> Since the BMJ is dabbling in politics, do they call them "US/UK
>> >> sanctions", or UN sanctions?
>> >>
>> >The point is that they are not 'dabbling in politics'. To call mentioning
>> >the deliberate murder of half a million children in a poor country by
>rich
>> >ones 'dabbling in politics' is simply nonsense.
>>
>> The only deliberate murder is by Saddam Hussein. So why do you keep
>> referring to the UN sanctions as US/UK sanctions? And surely the BMJ
>> must have taken in to effect the health effects of all the other
>> Saddam created health risks that you snipped from my post, otherwise
>> how could they tell if the deaths were due to Saddam not feeding them,
>> or due to torture, burning oil wells, and badly managed chemical
>> weapons factories? Surely they commented on these externalities in
>> their report.
>>
>I'm waiting, probably in vain, for you to read the references.
I've read your references. One is a review of a Pilger TV documentary,
the second is a short personal view of a WHO official about cancer
treatment in Iraq that doesn't mention children, and the third is a
letter from a Bagdad doctor, who would know that if he wrote the wrong
thing he'd be arrested for defaming the president or some other
trumped up charge and liable to several months of torture. None of the
references call the sanctions US/UK sanctions as you've claimed, altho
the first reference mentions examples of dual use items being stopped
at the behest of the US and the UK.
None of the references come even close to a peer reviewed study of the
death of Iraqi children and whether the causes were sanctions, let
alone a study of the reason for those sanctions. They amount to a TV
review, an op-ed piece, and a letter to the editor. Your references
are, to be blunt, a load of shite and even if accepted at face value
they don't support even the health part of your position, let alone
your dodgy political claims and anti Americanism.
>I say probably in vain because it is pretty clear to me that you are
>racist who couldn't give a shit about half a million chidren - unless one of
>them was yours.
The exact opposite is true. I believe that every Iraqi has the right
to vote for their leader, to live free of repression and torture, and
the right to food and medical treatment. The best way of achieving
this is to remove Saddam Hussein and his government and shut down
illegal weapons programs. To not do so is to allow this man to
continue to hold a whole country hostage. Which is why I support the
Americans, British, Australians and anyone else who cares to join in
when they invade.
>I think it pretty pathetic that you are so xenophobic, but it is your
>problem to live with yourself, not mine.
You are quite happy to abandon Iraqis to a life of misery and torture,
just so you can use them as part of your anti Americanism. Sorta like
a human McDonalds that can be smashed to show what evil people those
Americans are. And you accuse me of xenophobia?
David
Peter H.M. Brooks
> In article <aql8ou$gdf$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
>
> > "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>
> > > I do no such thing. Perhaps you better start attending remedial
> > > reading lessons?
>
> > Saying 'you've now stooped' in the context of the discussion, indicates
> > you accept that others stooped before, by implication, hence my point.
>
> Wrong. It meant that you started out with deranged fantasies
>
be exhaustive. To describe them as 'deranged fantasy' is extreme though. For
one thing they are not my ideas, but those widely reported and circulated.
For another the evidence is indeed there, even if it doesn't suit your world
view, the quality of the evidence for either proposition is indeed an
important question - here, though, it hasn't been addressed.
Peter H.M. Brooks
"David Pears" <dpears...@bigfoot.com.au> wrote in message
> >I say probably in vain because it is pretty clear to me that you are
> >racist who couldn't give a shit about half a million chidren - unless one
of
> >them was yours.
>
> The exact opposite is true. I believe that every Iraqi has the right
> to vote for their leader, to live free of repression and torture, and
> the right to food and medical treatment. The best way of achieving
> this is to remove Saddam Hussein and his government and shut down
> illegal weapons programs. To not do so is to allow this man to
> continue to hold a whole country hostage. Which is why I support the
> Americans, British, Australians and anyone else who cares to join in
> when they invade.
>
So you do accept the sanctions that have killed over 500,000 Iraqi children
are evil - in depriving people of food and medical treatment.
So, what about plans to invade Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, Korea, China and so
forth? Why do your 'standards' apply only to Iraq? Not to mention human
rights abuses by the US...
Now, I suppose you will try to argue that they are not double standards,
amazing.
Peter H.M. Brooks
"Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.183a04fad...@news.qsi.net.nz...
> In article <aql8l9$fv0$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net>, pe...@new.co.za says...
> >
> > "Peter H Metcalfe" <metc...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
> > > So it's completely and utterly wrong for the US to do some things but
> > > okay for Saddam to do things that are much much worse?
>
> > I think you've missed the point somewhere.
>
> I have missed nothing. I notice that you haven't even tried to deny
> outright what I just said. Your tedious waffling self-justification
> of your bankrupt ethics that follows only confirms my belief.
>
'bankrupt' and pointing them out 'tedious waffling'. I think it a great pity
that people are not taught ethics at school - then they wouldn't come with
the misconception that the above constituted an argument!
>
> After all, you think that nothing should be done about Saddam because
> he only affects a small stage! The last time I've heard a similar
> sentiment was when Stalin said "one death is a tragedy, ten million
> a statistic".
>
JJWilliams
> "T.N.O. @ Work" <barr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<3dc727ed$1@news>...
> > reply is inline..> > news:d7d9f309.02110...@posting.google.com...
> > > I know of only two Dunedins in the whole world!
> >
> > Here and California?
>
> Here and Florida.
I recall there being a Dunedin near Whipsnade Zoo - it was on the map anyway
but we never actually managed to find it.
J
Peter H Metcalfe
> > > Saying 'you've now stooped' in the context of the discussion, indicates
> > > you accept that others stooped before, by implication, hence my point.
> > Wrong. It meant that you started out with deranged fantasies
> You clearly don't like the evidence presented
You presented no evidence at all for Saddam being installed by the
CIA.
> - and I have not attempted to be exhaustive.
That's not all you have not attempted by be. Logic, honesty
and intelligence are other traits that you have not bothered to
present in this debate.
> To describe them as 'deranged fantasy' is extreme though.
Nevertheless it is truth.
> For one thing they are not my ideas, but those widely reported and
> circulated.
So you admit that you have no original thoughts of your own?
> For another the evidence is indeed there, even if it doesn't suit your
> world view,
I don't care whether it suits my world view, all I care about is
whether you had the evidence to back your statement up. You do not.
> the quality of the evidence for either proposition is indeed an
> important question - here, though, it hasn't been addressed.
I've addressed it in case you haven't noticed. I've pointed out
that the book review that you provided a link for does not support
your assertion that Saddam was installed by the CIA. In response
you accused me of lying and dissembling amongst other idiocies.
--Peter Metcalfe