Home » CHIT-CHAT » Off Topic Discussions » Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of
Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304331] Fri, 04 May 2012 20:03 Go to next message
cdudau
Venezuela

Report message to a moderator

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304336] Fri, 04 May 2012 20:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lockie is currently offline lockie

 
Messages:3721
Registered:February 2006
Location: Scotland
If this gets any more than 5 genuine replies , my hat will be eaten :moosegrin:

Tao , copy pasting whatever drivel you find on the net isn't really what the spirit of this thread is all about .
C'mon , think up some interesting stuff ..... Very Happy

Report message to a moderator

Captain

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304337] Fri, 04 May 2012 20:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cdudau
Delete it if you must.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304338] Fri, 04 May 2012 20:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Logisteric

 
Messages:3199
Registered:December 2008
Location: B
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJoVi3imFQw&feature=related[/video]

Report message to a moderator

Captain
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304362] Sat, 05 May 2012 07:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bearpit is currently offline Bearpit

 
Messages:1073
Registered:August 2001
Location: Sydney Australia.
If Chavez dissasociated himself from fruitcakes such as those in North Korea he would gain a lot more credibility. He is painted as a radical by Murdoch's press because he wants to ..... remove the capitalista corporate strangelhold and control over the worlds natural resources by starting at home and kicking out all the multinational corporations .... ahhhh, that's bad news for some folks.

What will give way first ..... the socialistas or debt ridden amerikanishe corporazis.

How much interest upon interest and accumulating more interest can the US economy continue with ?

How can it ever pay back all that debt with the opportunity for employment being continually eroded ..... start more wars then steal the natural resources of countries "liberated" from the evils of nasty dictators Smile Iraq has oil, lots of it so does Iran ..... next target ??? maybe.

What about Burma .... dictator but hardly a squeek about him because Burma has mainly trees but hardly any oil. North Korea ..... dictator but not worth removing because they have no natural resources. Bob Mugabe in Zimbabwe .... dictator but with hardly any natural resources worth stealing. Sudan ..... they got oil and recently the part of the country where most of it is under was "liberated" and has a predominately christian puppet regime busy signing away mining & drilling rights to ..... oil companies.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304508] Tue, 08 May 2012 21:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
veedotja2 is currently offline veedotja2

 
Messages:86
Registered:April 2012
Location: New York
I will contribute a serious post (!) of high academic caliber.

Bearpit
How much interest upon interest and accumulating more interest can the US economy continue with ?

How can it ever pay back all that debt with the opportunity for employment being continually eroded ..... start more wars then steal the natural resources of countries "liberated" from the evils of nasty dictators Smile Iraq has oil, lots of it so does Iran ..... next target ??? maybe.


I suppose that all the oil that the US has "liberated" (now liberated by Barack Obama for the 3+ years of his presidency) will hopefully find it's way to the gas pump to reduce these record high gasoline prices in the US. They are much higher than the Bush-era prices ever were. Smile

Actually the US doesn't take any specific material goods, but gets into trouble internationally trying to "build up" governments which is a terrible idea.

Oh, yeah, Saddam Hussein *was* a nasty dictator. No smiley face. Do you doubt it? He massacred almost A MILLION PEOPLE and committed one of the worst genocides ever using nerve gas and machineguns. Ethnic minorities, other arabs, Kuwaitis, rape "virtue" squads to rape your wife in front of you. Waterboarding? No. Hussein engaged in *real, state-sanctioned torture.* You can dispute the US involvement in the middle east but Saddam was a nasty fucker. And we didn't steal a gallon of oil because it belongs to the people of Iraq, not the US.

On Chavez: it isn't Murdoch's press. Jeez. He only owns Fox and a couple of papers, some internatonal. He is only one well-known piece of the media. The Chavez criticism comes from places as diverse as The New York Times, MSNBC and the John Stewart Show. If Venezuela wasn't propped up by massive oil reserves you wouldn't even know the name Chavez. Can you name another South American "elected" official? 13 years Chavez, time to step down. It's easy to sign labor laws, seize property, and fix prices when the country will always have the liquid money flowing. US and the Eurozone aren't so lucky.

Report message to a moderator

Corporal 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304509] Tue, 08 May 2012 21:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
veedotja2 is currently offline veedotja2

 
Messages:86
Registered:April 2012
Location: New York
lockie
If this gets any more than 5 genuine replies , my hat will be eaten :moosegrin:


I love these debates.

Report message to a moderator

Corporal 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304551] Thu, 10 May 2012 08:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bearpit is currently offline Bearpit

 
Messages:1073
Registered:August 2001
Location: Sydney Australia.
I agree Saddam was a very nasty peice of work and his removal a good step forward.

However replacing a dictator with a puppet regime is not the way to go (in some person's minds at least) though sadly it's become a standard modus operandi.

Your right that the US per se doesn't take (steal) actual materials ..... it imposes a puppet regime which signs contracts with various multi national corporations and they literally steal the liberated nations natural resources by paying ridiculously under market value prices and making a profiting on the mark up. Sorta like confronting someone in the subway, pointing a gun in their faces then saying i'll give you a dollar for the contents of your wallet .... hand it over.

The US congress doesn't run the government nor the president. They are just there on stage to make it appear as though democracy is something real and has identifiable faces.

Murdoch, it's more than a few newspapers & tv stations. However he is a symbol of corporate propoganda "mouthpeice" journalism. Not independent investigative journalism & reporting of facts ..... mindwash for the unwashed masses. Fox news .... ah my, what a joke.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304575] Thu, 10 May 2012 23:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cdudau
@Bearpit

Very well said.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304594] Sat, 12 May 2012 02:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
veedotja2 is currently offline veedotja2

 
Messages:86
Registered:April 2012
Location: New York
Bearpit
The US congress doesn't run the government nor the president. They are just there on stage to make it appear as though democracy is something real and has identifiable faces.

Murdoch, it's more than a few newspapers & tv stations. However he is a symbol of corporate propoganda "mouthpeice" journalism. Not independent investigative journalism & reporting of facts ..... mindwash for the unwashed masses. Fox news .... ah my, what a joke.


If the Congress has no power, and they do, really, who does? Please don't go conspiracy theory on me and point to some vague military-industrial complex without naming names. We have three branches of gov't that are often in bitter deadlock which is kind of the point. This may be a good thing depending on your point of view.

Murdoch is just a piece of the large universe of news outlets everyone has access to. We have such an enormous variety of news in the world and in the US. In fact I was just browsing huffpo, drudge report and Aljazeera an hour ago. Really, people pay too much attention to Murdoch. CNN and the NYT are as big as Fox and The Post and are also part of big corporations. Doesn't disney own ABC as well as TV and radio stations in many countries? What is their political agenda? Everything major is part of a corporation and has an agenda. Turner Broadcasting is owned by megacorp Time Warner which merged with AOL and has hundreds of channels in a dozen countries including CNN! Do you know who their executive board gave to? Soros made a *Billion Euros* shorting the Pound and pumps massive funds into US election politics.

Just saying this to say not to get distracted. There is LOT to keep track of out there and the paymasters aren't always obvious. Murdoch's is one of many organizations that are to big to be healthy but he isn't the only one and it is bad even if they aren't Republican-aligned.

I think focus on "Fox news" takes away from the larger issues like stupid wars and deficit spending which neither the Bush (for 8 years) nor the Obama administration (for three, one year with a supermajority and full control of two branches of gov't) seem to be able or willing to do anything about. Sad really.

I'm voting for Ron Paul.

Report message to a moderator

Corporal 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #304595] Sat, 12 May 2012 03:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cdudau
To me, capitalist economics is unsustainable and a destroyer of advancement. They only benefit the bourgeoisie.

I think it is a great thing that poor indigenous workers in South America are granted some kind of rights in relation to being a contingent worker.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305220] Sun, 27 May 2012 05:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
veedotja2 is currently offline veedotja2

 
Messages:86
Registered:April 2012
Location: New York
tao
To me, capitalist economics is unsustainable and a destroyer of advancement. They only benefit the bourgeoisie.

I think it is a great thing that poor indigenous workers in South America are granted some kind of rights in relation to being a contingent worker.


Yeah, that's called serfdom. Do they get a chance to rise above their station? Never! It's like in Mexico where YOU NEVER GET THE TITLE TO THE LAND you "own." Sure, you are a usufructuary, but never can pass this benefit on to your children. It sounds swell to "grant" rights to the "workers," but like serfdom and communism, it's a lie. At least the US gave, free and clear, land and animals to freed slaves, who now own their land in the US. That's honest. Slavery is fucked up, which is why we abolished it, but we gave real property and the rights to it. Those slaves' grandchildren have houses and land. Those indiginous workers in South America will still be indiginous workers in 100 years given a pittance by the government company that holds title.

With respect to capitalism: I don't think there is any pure capitalism left in the US. Not many places in the world either. The problem in the US is that it is more "Corporatist" than capitalist. There are so many gov't rules and regulations, so many lawsuits, so much bribery, so much competition with nations without any environmental laws or labor laws that capitalism can't act as intended. Our government is so powerful every deep pocket is knocking on the door paying for favors. This is an argument for limited gov't - the less the gov't can do the less advantage you get by bribing it.

Capitalism has given us the artificial heart, the iPhone, Viagra, the car, the internet (as we know it today with Google and Facebook, et al), Jagged Alliance 2, etc. Money is a phenomenal motivator with the correct rule structure. It is important ot have rules such as no monopolies, no price fixing, union laws, etc. The patent process enshrined in the US Constitution allows a small window of time in which to make your money in the "useful arts and sciences." Then we all get the benefit when it expires. There are those that abuse the patent laws but that isn't the point.

There is a place for charity and giving but you can't count on it. I am a fan of open source software and charity giving. Nevertheless, what do you care if someone gets rich if we all get to drive cars and eat ice cream? Henry Ford, Steve Jobs, George Steinbrenner, Mark Zuckerberg didn't steal their wealth. They created industries and paid plenty in taxes along the way that are spent to create a county like the US where the main problem in the poor is obesity, not starvation.

I'd rather be "poor" in a capitalist society than "rich" in a socialist one. No bread and sausage coupons for me in some "workers paradise," thanks.

Report message to a moderator

Corporal 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305420] Thu, 31 May 2012 10:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SmokinGun is currently offline SmokinGun

 
Messages:69
Registered:June 2007
Location: Land of New Rising Sun
VeeDotJA2
I suppose that all the oil that the US has "liberated" (now liberated by Barack Obama for the 3+ years of his presidency) will hopefully find it's way to the gas pump to reduce these record high gasoline prices in the US. They are much higher than the Bush-era prices ever were. Smile

Oh, yeah, Saddam Hussein *was* a nasty dictator. He massacred almost A MILLION PEOPLE and committed one of the worst genocides ever using nerve gas and machineguns. And we didn't steal a gallon of oil because it belongs to the people of Iraq, not the US.


Not sure what you're talking about regarding oil? U.S involvment in the Mid east has predominantly ALWAYS been about oil. All time record profits for oil co.s in the past years...are you that naive to think that price of gas would drop after taking over Iraq? Securing oil, selling weapons is what good ol usa is all about. Largest single user of oil on the planet? U.S. military.

Yup Sadam was a bad man...but the U.S govt are the true evil fuckers on the planet. Far worse than sadam ever was...perhaps ye should do a little homework before condemning Sadam and turning a blind eye to the u.s. govt/foreign policy makers?

More than 50% of u.s. citizens are at, or below poverty rate. Pretty sure they could benefit from Chavez style governing..healthcare, shelter, land, food. Currently our unregulated run away capitalism isn't working too well for the majority of citizens. We have Corporate capitalism profit..and Socialist loss. Screw that. Banks and the "too big too fail" companies rape profits and when they're done screwing over whatever they can and run into losses...it becomes socialist taxpayer debt. No thanks.

They still making those deeliscious gingerbread hats in Scotland? Or are they made of Peat these days? :headbanger:

Report message to a moderator

Corporal
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305474] Fri, 01 June 2012 18:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
howareyou32 is currently offline howareyou32

 
Messages:424
Registered:March 2009
Location: New York, New York
It is not just about oil. The money that uSA spend on the mid east will take decades to recovery. It make you wonder what it reallly is about.

Report message to a moderator

Master Sergeant
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305507] Sat, 02 June 2012 09:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
veedotja2 is currently offline veedotja2

 
Messages:86
Registered:April 2012
Location: New York
SmokinGun

....
#1 Largest single user of oil on the planet? U.S. military.
....
#2 Yup Sadam was a bad man...but the U.S govt are the true evil fuckers on the planet. Far worse than sadam ever was...perhaps ye should do a little homework before condemning Sadam and turning a blind eye to the u.s. govt/foreign policy makers?
....
#3 Currently our unregulated run away capitalism isn't working too well for the majority of citizens. We have Corporate capitalism profit..and Socialist loss.
....


1) What? Any sources for this wild-ass claim? What's your point anyway? The US tanks don't pump gas from a spigot in Iraq! Anyway, I know that the Indian and Chinese governments use far more oil and therefore have far more to do with the price of oil on the spot market than US does. There are a lot of huge oil consumers in the world, everything isn't controlled by the US! The US also produces a lot of domestic oil. You clearly don't understand the geopolitics of oil pricing and are beating the old "US-oil-war-bad" drum. I recognize the faults of US foreign policy but we cannot have a discussion if you do not clearly understand the factors involved in the price of crude oil.

2) Perhaps YOU should do a little homework. Comparing the US Gov't to a nerve-gassing mass rapist and genocidal murderer is simply absurd and shows your biases. Please just go to to Wikipedia or any site that talks about mass murderers. Saddam is right up there with Hitler. If you are referring to US history I should inform you that it has been a long time since the US abandoned its slavery past and imperial intentions, we fought internal wars over this. There are also many nations with more recent colonial pasts (I'm looking at France, Japan and England here) that no one wants to criticize. Is it so fashionable to bash the US that facts can't get in the way?

3) I largely agree with you but for one thing: we don't have much Capitalism left in the US. If only we did! Corporate interests rule the day. Socialism has a terrible track record and any student of history is properly frightened of it. Nevertheless, every major institution in the US is either government (Socialist: army, police, public services), heavily unionized (Socialist: automotive, utilities) or financial (Corporatist: JPMorgan, Bank of America, Lehman Brothers). The heart of the US business world is small businesses (Capitalist: contractors, retailers, etc) and this is the primary jobs driver. Unfortunately the small businessman is becoming part of a shrinking middle class. Those industries such as health care and education are so heavily regulated that they cannot operate correctly as Capitalist institutions.

Listen, the US's problems aren't a failure of Capitalism, they are a sign that big business and big government shouldn't mix. A large gov't is a target for corruption.

Report message to a moderator

Corporal 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305508] Sat, 02 June 2012 09:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
veedotja2 is currently offline veedotja2

 
Messages:86
Registered:April 2012
Location: New York
howareyou32
It is not just about oil. The money that uSA spend on the mid east will take decades to recovery. It make you wonder what it reallly is about.


The money spent on the war is a monumental waste. This is a terrible failing of both Bush and Obama. Look into Ron Paul. He is a Libertarian (running as a Republican). His platform involves ending the war. Unlike Obama, the 70+ year old Paul has a track record we can actually look at. He voted against the original invasion when he was a Congressman in 2002!

Report message to a moderator

Corporal 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305545] Sun, 03 June 2012 01:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cdudau
...some people argue with fools all day...time passes.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305551] Sun, 03 June 2012 14:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lockie is currently offline lockie

 
Messages:3721
Registered:February 2006
Location: Scotland
As for replies to 'your' debate Tao , my hat remains uneaten ..... Very Happy
as for the other 'replies' , find your own topic ! Cool

Report message to a moderator

Captain

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305578] Mon, 04 June 2012 01:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cdudau
It really was what you said in the beginning:

"...copy pasting whatever drivel I find on the net..."

And not necessarily a debate.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305630] Tue, 05 June 2012 21:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SmokinGun is currently offline SmokinGun

 
Messages:69
Registered:June 2007
Location: Land of New Rising Sun
VeeDotJA2

1) What? Any sources for this wild-ass claim? What's your point anyway?


Hardly a "wild-ass claim" dipshit that the largest and most widespread military on the planet (count bases and countries) is the single largest oil consumer on the planet. Are you saying the U.S. military has some secret technology that fuels itself without the use of oil? Can you not see that without oil the U.S. military would be rendered immobile and ineffective, especially considering the number of bases and countries it is operating from. Do you think the planes, naval ships and vehicles are running on vegetable oil? It is of vital importance that oil is secured to keep the military machine functioning, and to keep the American economy functioning.

sources-
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16281892
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/26194
http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/planet-biggest-gas-guzzler.htm

VeeDotJA2

The US also produces a lot of domestic oil. You clearly don't understand the geopolitics of oil pricing and are beating the old "US-oil-war-bad" drum. I recognize the faults of US foreign policy but we cannot have a discussion if you do not clearly understand the factors involved in the price of crude oil.


Much of our foreign policy is motivated by oil, its access, and its profit...please enlighten me how that relates to crude oil pricing? You imply that invading Iraq had nothing to do with oil, and that if it did we would have lower gas prices at the pump? Are you that naive? Do you think that oil companies are interested in making less profit because oil is more (or less) readibly available? In fact they have posted record profits

On domestic oil prices in the states-
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30806
On oil profits-
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/02/08/421061/big-oil-higher-prices-record-profits-less-oil/?mobile=nc

VeeDotJA2

2) Perhaps YOU should do a little homework. Comparing the US Gov't to a nerve-gassing mass rapist and genocidal murderer is simply absurd and shows your biases. Please just go to to Wikipedia or any site that talks about mass murderers. Saddam is right up there with Hitler. If you are referring to US history I should inform you that it has been a long time since the US abandoned imperial intentions...Is it so fashionable to bash the US that facts can't get in the way?


Well, its possible that you're either completly uninformed...or that you've been well propigandized and your religious faith will not allow you to see facts and reality. If Saddam is "right up there with Hitler" then what does that say about the U.S. govt supporting Adolf Hussein? It is FACTUAL that the U.S. govt supplied Saddam with biological, chemical, and conventional weapons. The U.S. govt also supplied him with Cash, military training and support knowing full well that he had used chemical weapons and that he was a terrible dictator.

The U.S. govt consistently puts in place and supports nasty dictators and when it then becomes convenient...denounces those dictators as evil. All in the name of "freedom and democracy".

Since you're a fan of Ron Paul, perhaps this would be a good place to start, although Paul did not coin the C.I.A. phrase "blowback"- Iraqgate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2m7kRMwC-U

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqgate
Quote:

Returning to Iraq, it surely qualifies as a leading criminal state. Defending the U.S. plan to attack Iraq at a televised public meeting on February 18, Secretaries Albright and Cohen repeatedly invoked the ultimate atrocity: Saddam was guilty of "using weapons of mass destruction against his neighbors as well as his own people," his most awesome crime. "It is very important for us to make clear that the United States and the civilized world cannot deal with somebody who is willing to use those weapons of mass destruction on his own people, not to speak of his neighbors," Albright emphasized in an angry response to a questioner who asked about U.S. support for Suharto. Shortly after, Senator Lott condemned Kofi Annan for seeking to cultivate a "human relationship with a mass murderer," and denounced the Administration for trusting a person who would sink so low.

Ringing words. Putting aside their evasion of the question raised, Albright and Cohen only forgot to mention

Report message to a moderator

Corporal
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305661] Wed, 06 June 2012 22:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
veedotja2 is currently offline veedotja2

 
Messages:86
Registered:April 2012
Location: New York
SmokinGun
dipshit


Thank you.

All these sources! Is it because I pointed you to Wikipedia (did you go?) to research Saddam Hussein.

SmokinGun
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16281892


I found this:
"If the Defense Department were a country, it would rank about 38th in the world for oil consumption, right behind the Philippines." So this source does not state the US has the largest oil consumption of any organization, country or whatever.

SmokinGun
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/26194


This source does not support your claim, where did you dig this one up?

SmokinGun
http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/planet-biggest-gas-guzzler.htm


I found this:
"According to 2007 CIA World Fact Book, when oil consumption is broken down per capita, the U.S. Department of Defense ranks fourth in the world (behind three actual nations, that is.)" This ultimately misses the point because the DoD isn't the Army, the source is old, and doesn't make your point.

SmokinGun
Much of our foreign policy is motivated by oil, its access, and its profit...please enlighten me how that relates to crude oil pricing? You imply that invading Iraq had nothing to do with oil, and that if it did we would have lower gas prices at the pump? Are you that naive? Do you think that oil companies are interested in making less profit because oil is more (or less) readibly available? In fact they have posted record profits.

On domestic oil prices in the states-
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30806


This site makes silly claims. They even have a disclaimer, "The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article." What are the quality of your sources here? The implications of the source are that the US can price fix oil a bit locally which still doesn't bear on global crude prices.

SmokinGun
On oil profits-
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/02...-oil/?mobile=nc


I read this article a long time ago. We aren't talking about record profits here, or why you have a problem with profit if the money isn't made unethically. When did the conversation shift to profit=evil?

Still misses the point that oil wars aren't about "taking the oil" but ensuring a stable supply. This is not a vindication of the US foreign policy positions. You don't understand the details which is important to have a discussion. Your sources don't back up your statement above anyway. I don't know how you can believe I am "naive." Another dig?

SmokinGun
Well, its possible that you're either completly uninformed...or that you've been well propigandized and your religious faith will not allow you to see facts and reality. If Saddam is "right up there with Hitler" then what does that say about the U.S. govt supporting Adolf Hussein? It is FACTUAL that the U.S. govt supplied Saddam with biological, chemical, and conventional weapons. The U.S. govt also supplied him with Cash, military training and support knowing full well that he had used chemical weapons and that he was a terrible dictator.


Well, now my "religious faith" is called into play. You would love If I identified as Christian, what would you say then I wonder. You are wrong though. Nice try to make this a religious discussion. Did you make a mistake there with "Adolf Hussein?" Besides, *I* didn't say Saddam is up there with Hitler, I've got sources too, see:

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/internationalhumanrights/p/saddam_hussein.htm
http://www.lvrj.com/news/saddam-s-interrogator-has-unique-perspective-of-mass-murderer-106815233.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15285264/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/witnesses-tell-saddam-trial-killings-kurds/
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iraq501/events_uprising.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4683290

Wow. That was easy. I love copy and paste. I'm actually making a joke because as an old school debater I've yet to meet anyone besides you who didn't think Saddam was evil. Did I need to even source this. Wow again.

This won't matter to you because you will blame it on the US giving Saddam weapons of mass destruction that nobody could find...

It is important to note that Hitler was elected, was Time Magazine Man of the Year 1938 before his dictatorial ambitions were realized, and that it was the *US and Allies* that took him down. Same for Saddam. Ulitmately to pin the atrocities of Saddam on the US is simply bizarre. His own people, Iraqi Citizens, tried him and put him to death after a trial so you might just be alone here in your notions.

SmokinGun
The U.S. govt consistently puts in place and supports nasty dictators and when it then becomes convenient...denounces those dictators as evil. All in the name of "freedom and democracy".


We agree nation building is a bad idea. Why this shot at the US?

SmokinGun
Since you're a fan of Ron Paul, perhaps this would be a good place to start, although Paul did not coin the C.I.A. phrase "blowback"- Iraqgate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2m7kRMwC-U
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqgate


Why are you arguing this with me, I agree with Paul on Iraq and other elements of his foreign policy. Did you really read my posts?

SmokinGun
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199804--.htm

On relations with Saddam and Bush 1
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=31145

On U.S. atrocities in Iraq- U.S.biological warfare vs Iraq-
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0808-07.htm

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Obama and War-
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=31265


Ouch, your sources aren't in support of a point anymore, you have started to rant with weblinks.

SmokinGun
"dumbfuck Americans," "oblivious" to their own countries atrocities and global actions while waving their flag and hypocritically condemning the actions of others.


Now my mini rant:
Thanks again. You make a lot of assumptions. You lump in all US citizens together and throw an insult or two in there. I think I made my points well and you just resorted to the University of Google cut-N-paste technique. Half your posts are from one website with weak credentials (globalresearch.ca) you should expand your universe of information.

I don't know what you think Americans are, but I look in the streets here and I see very few old white guys. I occupy wall streeters, blacks, latinos, Chinese immigrants. I see a lot of internal disagreement on what path we see for the United States in the future. We have a president who never knew his dad and smoked a lot of pot growing up. What do you know about Americans? We all the same to you? Do you know my politics (you imagine you do), my immigrant status, my ethnicity or my color? You know I'm a "dumbfuck," though, right?

It is convenient to forget positive US actions like Somalia and Kuwait where the US intervened to save the lives of thousands of Muslims. Forget World War I and World War II where tens of thousand of Americans gave their lives, even black Americans without equal rights at home, to secure the freedoms of others. Forget the US Civil War and some of the great policies we have adopted such as women's suffrage and elimination of compulsory military service. There are many "enlightened" countries like Saudi Arabia that lacks equal rights for women and France that forces its citizens into the military!

You can turn this discussion into US-bashing and "dumbfuck American" bashing if you want but I'll just check out here. Nice speaking with you anyway.

[Updated on: Wed, 06 June 2012 22:36] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Corporal 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305670] Thu, 07 June 2012 01:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:1966
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
VeeDotJA2
It is important to note that Hitler was elected, [..]

No, he was not. He lost the 1932 presidential election to Hindenburg. Hitler then used political tactics and intrigue to force the president to appoint him chancellor in 1933. The following elections and legislation were no longer free but at least half directed by terror, oppression, intimidation and murder.
(E.g. the enabling act took place with armed forces of SS and SA being present in parliament while all communist and some socialist representatives had been illegally arrested)
In the end Hitler appointed himself president.

JFTR.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305673] Thu, 07 June 2012 01:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
Bearpit
I agree Saddam was a very nasty peice of work and his removal a good step forward.

However replacing a dictator with a puppet regime is not the way to go (in some person's minds at least) though sadly it's become a standard modus operandi.

Your right that the US per se doesn't take (steal) actual materials ..... it imposes a puppet regime which signs contracts with various multi national corporations and they literally steal the liberated nations natural resources by paying ridiculously under market value prices and making a profiting on the mark up. Sorta like confronting someone in the subway, pointing a gun in their faces then saying i'll give you a dollar for the contents of your wallet .... hand it over.

The US congress doesn't run the government nor the president. They are just there on stage to make it appear as though democracy is something real and has identifiable faces.

Murdoch, it's more than a few newspapers & tv stations. However he is a symbol of corporate propoganda "mouthpeice" journalism. Not independent investigative journalism & reporting of facts ..... mindwash for the unwashed masses. Fox news .... ah my, what a joke.
After the US sponsored free elections it sure looks like the 'puppet' Iraqi government favors us:Quote:
Blood For Oil
June 5th, 2012 - 5:15 am

Tim Arango and Clifford Krauss of the New York Times report that

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305677] Thu, 07 June 2012 01:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
IMHO the problem in Latin America isn't Capitalism, it's 'Crony Capitalism' and Socialism/Communism haven't been a cure.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305684] Thu, 07 June 2012 03:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cdudau
I want to join, but can't organize my thoughts...

Report message to a moderator

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #305792] Sun, 10 June 2012 04:02 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
There hasn't been any response to 'Crony Capitalism' so here a link Crony Capitalism that explains it's whys and wherefores.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #309363] Tue, 21 August 2012 03:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Will Gates is currently offline Will Gates

 
Messages:1012
Registered:September 2006
Location: Far far away.
It's all NIMBY (not in my back yard) fear. Everybody is guilty of this. 96% of Amerikaans can't have a sensible debate about left of centre governments in central and south America. Likewise 96% of Brits can't have a sensible discussion about Ulster and 96% of Russians get spooked about Chechenya. Reading the "drivel" seems to me he's only being as civilised to workers as the EU already is. Why should second world states be content to be the sweatshops of the first world? Your "affordable" Nike trainers come at a hidden human cost that doesn't bear thinking about.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #309920] Sun, 09 September 2012 02:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
tao
Venezuela

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #309922] Sun, 09 September 2012 04:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
Will Gates
It's all NIMBY (not in my back yard) fear. Everybody is guilty of this. 96% of Amerikaans can't have a sensible debate about left of centre governments in central and south America. Likewise 96% of Brits can't have a sensible discussion about Ulster and 96% of Russians get spooked about Chechenya. Reading the "drivel" seems to me he's only being as civilised to workers as the EU already is. Why should second world states be content to be the sweatshops of the first world? Your "affordable" Nike trainers come at a hidden human cost that doesn't bear thinking about.
Naturally you mean like Spain, Greece, Italy, ..., where they've been sooo good to the workers that they are basket cases or near basket cases:Quote:
Bit from 'Paine's Island

http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2012/08/03/paines-island/#more-23676

The problem of government has long occupied political writers. Thomas Paine, tried to think the dilemmas through and concluded that certain things were better left to arrangements by barter or the market than they were to government. Government

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #309930] Sun, 09 September 2012 13:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Khor1255 is currently offline Khor1255

 
Messages:1817
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ
VeeDotJA2
SmokinGun
dipshit


Thank you.

All these sources! Is it because I pointed you to Wikipedia (did you go?) to research Saddam Hussein.

SmokinGun
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16281892


I found this:
"If the Defense Department were a country, it would rank about 38th in the world for oil consumption, right behind the Philippines." So this source does not state the US has the largest oil consumption of any organization, country or whatever.

SmokinGun
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/26194


This source does not support your claim, where did you dig this one up?

SmokinGun
http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/planet-biggest-gas-guzzler.htm


I found this:
"According to 2007 CIA World Fact Book, when oil consumption is broken down per capita, the U.S. Department of Defense ranks fourth in the world (behind three actual nations, that is.)" This ultimately misses the point because the DoD isn't the Army, the source is old, and doesn't make your point.

SmokinGun
Much of our foreign policy is motivated by oil, its access, and its profit...please enlighten me how that relates to crude oil pricing? You imply that invading Iraq had nothing to do with oil, and that if it did we would have lower gas prices at the pump? Are you that naive? Do you think that oil companies are interested in making less profit because oil is more (or less) readibly available? In fact they have posted record profits.

On domestic oil prices in the states-
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30806


This site makes silly claims. They even have a disclaimer, "The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article." What are the quality of your sources here? The implications of the source are that the US can price fix oil a bit locally which still doesn't bear on global crude prices.

SmokinGun
On oil profits-
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/02...-oil/?mobile=nc


I read this article a long time ago. We aren't talking about record profits here, or why you have a problem with profit if the money isn't made unethically. When did the conversation shift to profit=evil?

Still misses the point that oil wars aren't about "taking the oil" but ensuring a stable supply. This is not a vindication of the US foreign policy positions. You don't understand the details which is important to have a discussion. Your sources don't back up your statement above anyway. I don't know how you can believe I am "naive." Another dig?

SmokinGun
Well, its possible that you're either completly uninformed...or that you've been well propigandized and your religious faith will not allow you to see facts and reality. If Saddam is "right up there with Hitler" then what does that say about the U.S. govt supporting Adolf Hussein? It is FACTUAL that the U.S. govt supplied Saddam with biological, chemical, and conventional weapons. The U.S. govt also supplied him with Cash, military training and support knowing full well that he had used chemical weapons and that he was a terrible dictator.


Well, now my "religious faith" is called into play. You would love If I identified as Christian, what would you say then I wonder. You are wrong though. Nice try to make this a religious discussion. Did you make a mistake there with "Adolf Hussein?" Besides, *I* didn't say Saddam is up there with Hitler, I've got sources too, see:

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/internationalhumanrights/p/saddam_hussein.htm
http://www.lvrj.com/news/saddam-s-interrogator-has-unique-perspective-of-mass-murderer-106815233.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15285264/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/witnesses-tell-saddam-trial-killings-kurds/
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iraq501/events_uprising.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4683290

Wow. That was easy. I love copy and paste. I'm actually making a joke because as an old school debater I've yet to meet anyone besides you who didn't think Saddam was evil. Did I need to even source this. Wow again.

This won't matter to you because you will blame it on the US giving Saddam weapons of mass destruction that nobody could find...

It is important to note that Hitler was elected, was Time Magazine Man of the Year 1938 before his dictatorial ambitions were realized, and that it was the *US and Allies* that took him down. Same for Saddam. Ulitmately to pin the atrocities of Saddam on the US is simply bizarre. His own people, Iraqi Citizens, tried him and put him to death after a trial so you might just be alone here in your notions.

SmokinGun
The U.S. govt consistently puts in place and supports nasty dictators and when it then becomes convenient...denounces those dictators as evil. All in the name of "freedom and democracy".


We agree nation building is a bad idea. Why this shot at the US?

SmokinGun
Since you're a fan of Ron Paul, perhaps this would be a good place to start, although Paul did not coin the C.I.A. phrase "blowback"- Iraqgate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2m7kRMwC-U
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqgate


Why are you arguing this with me, I agree with Paul on Iraq and other elements of his foreign policy. Did you really read my posts?

SmokinGun
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199804--.htm

On relations with Saddam and Bush 1
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=31145

On U.S. atrocities in Iraq- U.S.biological warfare vs Iraq-
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0808-07.htm

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Obama and War-
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=31265


Ouch, your sources aren't in support of a point anymore, you have started to rant with weblinks.

SmokinGun
"dumbfuck Americans," "oblivious" to their own countries atrocities and global actions while waving their flag and hypocritically condemning the actions of others.


Now my mini rant:
Thanks again. You make a lot of assumptions. You lump in all US citizens together and throw an insult or two in there. I think I made my points well and you just resorted to the University of Google cut-N-paste technique. Half your posts are from one website with weak credentials (globalresearch.ca) you should expand your universe of information.

I don't know what you think Americans are, but I look in the streets here and I see very few old white guys. I occupy wall streeters, blacks, latinos, Chinese immigrants. I see a lot of internal disagreement on what path we see for the United States in the future. We have a president who never knew his dad and smoked a lot of pot growing up. What do you know about Americans? We all the same to you? Do you know my politics (you imagine you do), my immigrant status, my ethnicity or my color? You know I'm a "dumbfuck," though, right?

It is convenient to forget positive US actions like Somalia and Kuwait where the US intervened to save the lives of thousands of Muslims. Forget World War I and World War II where tens of thousand of Americans gave their lives, even black Americans without equal rights at home, to secure the freedoms of others. Forget the US Civil War and some of the great policies we have adopted such as women's suffrage and elimination of compulsory military service. There are many "enlightened" countries like Saudi Arabia that lacks equal rights for women and France that forces its citizens into the military!

You can turn this discussion into US-bashing and "dumbfuck American" bashing if you want but I'll just check out here. Nice speaking with you anyway.
I now have a new favorite poster. Welcome aboard man.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #309957] Mon, 10 September 2012 06:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
Back to:tao
Venezuela

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #309963] Mon, 10 September 2012 08:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bruno
Messages:1
Registered:September 2012
Regardless of personal experiences,

The increase of minimum wage in Thailand and legislation, giving Venezuelan workers more rights, are two totally different topics with two totally different effects.

Toggle Spoiler
Civilian
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #309965] Mon, 10 September 2012 11:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lockie is currently offline lockie

 
Messages:3721
Registered:February 2006
Location: Scotland
Mr 'Bruno' , do you honestly think we don't check members ? With this underhand attempt at returning to the forum , you have lost any chance of getting back , any time soon ! 'Bruno' is also banned btw . :angry:

Report message to a moderator

Captain

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #309972] Mon, 10 September 2012 13:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SmokinGun is currently offline SmokinGun

 
Messages:69
Registered:June 2007
Location: Land of New Rising Sun
Khor1255
I now have a new favorite poster. Welcome aboard man.


Nice, as usual the mouth breathing gaper has so much to offer. Careful not to drool too much in your own lap.

Quote:
It was never exactly rocket science. You didn

Report message to a moderator

Corporal
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #309973] Mon, 10 September 2012 13:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lockie is currently offline lockie

 
Messages:3721
Registered:February 2006
Location: Scotland
Quote:
Originally Posted By: Khor1255
I now have a new favorite poster. Welcome aboard man.


Nice, as usual the mouth breathing gaper has so much to offer. Careful not to drool too much in your own lap.


For goodness sake , grow up ! If you can't debate/argue without resorting to childish insults , then don't post at all .

Report message to a moderator

Captain

Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #310144] Fri, 14 September 2012 13:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
The Man speaks about the poor.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0S-O6WDalug&feature=related[/video]

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #310174] Sat, 15 September 2012 08:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
abradley is currently offline abradley

 
Messages:225
Registered:December 2001
Chavez and Venezuela's future:Quote:
Blazing fires and Venezuela

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant 1st Class
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #310228] Sun, 16 September 2012 20:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Khor1255 is currently offline Khor1255

 
Messages:1817
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ
abradley
tao
Venezuela

[Updated on: Sun, 16 September 2012 20:23] by Moderator

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #310232] Sun, 16 September 2012 21:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sam Hotte

 
Messages:1966
Registered:March 2009
Location: Middle of Germany
Khor1255
In other words, the better a politician performs for his constituancy the larger a percentage of the public fund he gets for reelection.

Who should be measuring the performance and how?

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major
Re: Chavez Signs New Labour Law in Act of [message #310238] Sun, 16 September 2012 23:25 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Khor1255 is currently offline Khor1255

 
Messages:1817
Registered:August 2003
Location: Pleasantville, NJ
Every American citizen who wants to participate in the system could tally their votes (likes, dislikes, indifference) for each politician that pertains to them. Obviously someone from California would have no say in what a senator from Maine did etc but everyone would get a vote on purely federal officials. These votes would determine how large a piece of the public fund each candidate would get towards his election. The system would be regulated by having numerous tallying stations according to party lines and non affiliates. In other words everyone would be chacking everyone else's numbers.

Report message to a moderator

Sergeant Major
Previous Topic: Not a joke (or is it?)
Next Topic: What's happening in Thailand?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Mar 29 08:26:15 GMT+2 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01898 seconds