BS: Obama caught in blatant lying

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 05:08 PM

Precisely. What Carol said.

It is because "the CIA is an agency of the US government which carries out tasks assigned to it by the National Command Authority" that the CIA commits the very actions to which Muslims object so strenuously, and that is why those actions have caused Islamic fighters to retaliate against the USA in various ways.

Mossad, likewise, acts on behalf of the government of Israel, and arouses the same sort of anger in Muslim populations.

From those angry populations come individuals who decide on their own to take some sort of violent retaliatory action. If so, they represent themselves and many people who agree with them, but they do not represent any government. Such are the members of Al Qaeda. They represent themselves and some very aggravated Muslims who agree with them, but they do not represent a government or a nation.

The USA response to 911 didn't make sense. It was a criminal act, not an act of war by a sovereign nation or the armed forces of a nation. As such, it should have been dealt with as an international police matter...not a war. The invasion of Afghanistan was a completely illogical and ineffective way to react to a criminal attack by a few Egyptians and Saudis under the alleged control of someone hiding out in some camp somewhere in the mountains of Afghanistan.

It was kind of like Russia going and bombing the hell out of Los Angeles because nine crazy guys from Kentucky and Alberta did a terrorist attack on Vladivostok...and they were rumoured to have received their orders from Kevin Costner who was hiding out in Los Angeles.

Idiotic.

But this time you had a "Pearl Harbour" event...yet no Japanese Navy, no Japanese Army or Air Force, and no Japan to retaliate against. Still, you had an infuriated and traumatized American public who wanted someone to pay for 911. So what did the US military do? Well, they did the obvious foolish thing...they went off to pulverize a wretchedly poor Muslim country that did NOT plan or cause 911, a country with a bunch of poorly-educated and naive Islamic fundamentalists in power who were complete fools when it came to presenting themselves to the world...a PR disaster in fact. Nobody in the world even recognized them as a legitimate government except for Pakistan and 2 other Muslim nations. They made a perfect punching bag for an angry America...and who would object? The Russians likewise detested them.

So Afghanistan and the Taliban got pulverized. And that made angry Americans feel better. (whoopee) It did absolutely nothing to reduce the risk of further Muslim terrorist attacks nor did it do anything to improve the security of the USA or anyone else's security. It was a completely inappropriate reaction to the events on 911. In time it has grown into a war that can't be won. Well, the Russians know all about that already...they had their turn in the 80s.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: pdq
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 05:40 PM

fact: Persia, now known as Iran, was a monarchy from about 1500 BC until 1979, when the government was destroyed by IslamoFacists. That is a run of 3500+ years in a unbroken series of monarchies.

fact: The Pahlavi monarchy lasted from 1925 until 1979. It had two kings. The term "shah" simply means king in Persia.

fact: The Iranian Parliament was created by the Shah and served at the pleasure of the Shah. It did not have the power to elevate Dr. Mohammed Mosaddeq to the supreme learership postition he claimed.

fact: The Revolutionary Guard killed more people in their first year the the Shah did in his 38 years of rule (1941-1979, inclusive).

fact: John Perkins is a professional liar. Always was and always will be. He said so himself. The current story of Iran 1953 come from Perkins and is substantially fantasy. The books he wrote made him a millionaire. That was their purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 06:16 PM

fact: Whenever a country with a large amount of domestic oil decides to control its own oil and market that oil to the world in whichever way it pleases, it soon becomes an official "enemy" of the USA and Great Britain. What follows is either a foreign-supported coup which brings down that country's government and installs an Anglo-American puppet in its place...or a open war with that country.

As for monarchies, I'm not necessarily against them. Britain has had a monarchy for a very long time, and I'm not against that. Nor am I against the Thai monarchy. Nor the Dutch monarchy. Nor any peaceful and reasonable monarchy. I am opposed to the Shah's dictatorial government following 1953 because it established a totally undemocratic rule, crushed a fledgling democracy, and was allied with foreign oil interests to the detriment of Iranian national independence. I am not well impressed in the least by the revolutionary Islamic government which replaced it in 1979 either, but at least they represent themselves instead of representing American and British oil interests.

If I was Iranian, I would prefer that to having the Shah in power.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: GUEST, heric
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 07:12 PM

Despite the elegant structures of your arguments, LH and CarolC, they present no logical or practical way to keep them fellers from killing our cartoonists, so I think you do not really have the solutions to our problems. Your theories, in other words, must therefore be off on a tangent. How must the US respond in a way that you will say "makes sense," when confronted with an absurdity such as cartoonisticide.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 07:36 PM

Our cartoonists? Heh! Surely you jest...

Look, I am opposed to all forms of terrorism, not just the state terrorism that is practiced by ambitious empires and great powers. I am also opposed to individual acts of terrorism by Islamic terrorists who set off suicide bombs in markets, hijack airplanes, and attack Dutch cartoonists.

This is the same as to say that I'm against all forms of criminal activity, which I am.

It doesn't change my opinions on American foreign policy one iota, because it is that foreign policy, plus the similar activities of Russia, Great Britain, and Israel, that have created the overall situation that incubates so many non-state Islamic terrorists. They are a reaction to the aggressive empire-building practiced by the more powerful countries on the weaker ones, and they are also a reaction to the local dictators propped up in their Islamic countries by Russia and the USA.

There is no immediate action the USA can take that would instantly resolve all of what has happened, but to further involve our troops in occupying Muslim nations is an action that will only exacerbate the situation, not improve it. Remember Vietnam? It was unwinnable. So is this war. The smart thing to do with an unwinnable war, specially when you are the occupier...is END the occupation.

What would follow an end to western occupation would be further infighting and further war between local groups in those countries, but that is their business, not ours.

Another huge problem which is contingent on all of this is the constant risk of a major war between India and Pakistan over longstanding issues in Kashmir and the disputed mountainous regions north of Kashmir. The USA is considerably worsening the risk of that by its ruinous military policies in Afghanistan and the Pakistani northern border areas, because those activities are greatly destabilizing Pakistan and enraging the Pakistani populace, which once considered the USA a friend and ally (while India was allied with the Russians). India watches this new situation like a hawk, hoping to cash in on Pakistani weaknesses. The Indians are delighted to see the USA alienated against the Muslim world, because that serves India's strategic concerns...in regards to Pakistan.

As for the Pakistanis, they have never been more isolated, more alone, and in a more miserable state than they are now. The only strategic "friend" they have left at this point is China...because China is also at odds with India.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 07:51 PM

I'd like to think that Obama has spent quite a bit of time reflecting on the history of the region along with the the failings of the Vietnam War...

Yeah, it's easy to say that Obama oughtta just apologize and have the US pull itself into a shell... Not so easilly done... Yes, I am concerned about escalations in Somalia and Yemen but I'd rather see good intellegence and surgical strikes than invasions and occupations... Kinda a choice of two bads but what are ya gonna do until there is some level of stabilization???

I mean, other than just advocate unrealistic policies...

Sould we have even invaded Afganistan??? No... Iraq??? Hell no... Stupid policies... Hey, if I have figured it out I'm sure it has also crossed Obama's mind... And I hope it will influence his policies...

Also, we have to keep in mind the political realities here in the US which are ver messed up...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 08:04 PM

Well, the thing is, Bobert...you and I aren't in the position Obama is. We have the luxury to talk in ideal terms about what could be done, and without experiencing the consequences. He doesn't. He's in the middle of it. Nevertheless, I'm sorry to say that I basically disagree with most of the decisions he's made so far while in office...although I do admire his rhetorical abilities. He's definitely preferable to John McCain (who can also shoot his mouth off now without facing the consequences). That's the luxury of not being the guy in power. You can say whatever you want about what you would do... ;-) Actually being there is another story.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 09:15 PM

Well, Obama really hasn't had to make too many policy decisions, LH... Yeah, he coulda been stronger on health care and lost what little gains the US may make... Maybe he should have... I mean, who woulda blamed him... I mean, if Bill Clinton couldn't get anywhere why would we expect Obama to???

He could have also said "no" at a time when it looked as if the financail system was going to collapse and, again, maybe he should have... Hard to say???

And yeah, he could have stood up against the military industrialists and the right wing noise machine on Afganistan and in doing so would have surely lost any chance of health care reform...

But the guy has been in a political meatgrinder and no matter what he does it ain't gonna make too many folks happy on any side of the issues...

Persoanlly, I would have told the generals to stuff it on Afganistan but I'm not president...

Yer right, being president is "another story"...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 10:32 PM

Heric, did you intend for your post to be in another thread? Somehow it doesn't seem to fit in the discussion on this thread. At least not anything I've posted in this one.


The American revolutionaries didn't have the authority to declare their independence and set up a democratic government, either, but we don't quibble with their right to do it. The same holds true for the democratically elected government in Iran that the US illegally deposed in a CIA backed coup.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 10:48 PM

People only normally disagree with that sort of thing when it wasn't their idea...while they agree with it enthusiastically when it was their idea.

The American revolutionaries were terrorists and traitors in the eyes of the English. They were freedom fighters in their own eyes. They were traitors in the eyes of the loyalists in the colonies (who comprised roughly 50% of the population and many of whom fled to Canada at war's end), and the loyalists were traitors in the revolutionaries' eyes.

It's always a question of whose ox is being gored or what side of the fence you're standing on. The reason Islamic fighters in Afghanistan were seen as "freedom fighters" by the USA in the 1980s was simple...they were killing Russians! ;-) Now that the Russians are gone, they're killing Americans. They are still fighting for the same thing they were back then: to drive out a foreign army of occupation.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 12:12 AM

I'm just saying that the "If we didn't do [this] then they wouldn't do [that]" theory of world peace and harmony doesn't appear to work when you get down to some of the nitty gritty details.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 12:34 AM

Well, heric, let's say you have a feud between two individuals that goes on...and on...and on. Or make it 2 nations. There are always past offences that both can point to in such a feud. There are always reasons for both to be angry, based on what has happened between them in the past.

But it doesn't end until one party decides to stop feuding. Endlessly calling the other party "evil" and trying to kill them all or terrorize them into surrender will not work.

You're never going to kill all the Middle Eastern and other people who are angry about American business and military policy in their countries. You just can't do it. They get born much faster than you can possibly kill them. They're never going to kill all of you either, and I'm sure they know that full well, but they will keep fighting because our troops are on their land. And that's one hell of a good reason to keep on fighting. They are not on your land, you're on theirs.

You (Americans in general, I mean) would fight too, if an occupying foreign army from some greater military power was on your land. And you'd never stop fighting them till they left.

What Osama launched his jihad over way back in the 90's was the presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia and the fact that the corrupt Saudi Royal family is in cahoots with American business interests and doesn't represent the common people of their country. For that he had his Saudi citizenship taken away.

I can fully understand his position on that. That doesn't mean I agree with him launching terrorist attacks on civilians, but I do understand exactly what he is objecting to. His political cause is legitimate...although his methods are not, if they involve attacking civilian targets in the USA or elsewhere. If they involve fighting USA occupying forces on Muslim lands, though...and they do...then his methods in that respect are completely legitimate, from the perspective of most people living in those lands.

These things have to be understood. You can't wait for "the other side" to grow up, let go of all its old hatreds, and find a path to agreement that suits your purposes...and you can't just dismiss them as "evil". It's never that simple. They aren't any more evil than you, they simply have their own interests. You've got to make the first move in that process of finding common ground yourself or it may never happen.

And it's the foreign occupier who MUST leave in the end...not the local people. These wars won't end till your soldiers (and privately employed mercenaries) leave those lands. There is no "victory" to be found by America in these wars. Victory is impossible for America under the circumstances in the Middle East and central Asia. Victory can only come finally to the local people when all the foreign armies leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 12:52 AM

I'm just saying that the "If we didn't do [this] then they wouldn't do [that]" theory of world peace and harmony doesn't appear to work when you get down to some of the nitty gritty details.

How would we know? We've never tried.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 01:54 PM

I'm willing to bet that if Hitler had never invaded and occupied Poland that hundreds of thousands of Poles would never have volunteered their services in WWII to anyone at all who would provide them with a gun or a ship or an airplane, and gone out and enthusiastically killed Germans...

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: robomatic
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 03:56 PM

I personally think that Obama is a more or less 'standard' American President, only, I think and hope, smarter than the previous one. I'm sure you noticed that according to his pre-election statments about prioritizing the war, we sent more men to Afghanistan almost before we did anything else anywhere. We have maintained our attacks from our drones in the air and used them more than almost during the entire Bush regime.
Nevertheless, what is going on, the big picture, is that the Islamic world is in a full scale civil war where its literalist, 'fundamentalist' elements are trying to make a last ditch stand against the secular world of the Twenty First century. It is variously counter-interpreted as a war against other religions, a war against Western oppression and occupation, a war against the forces of Shaitan, a war against globalization, etc. etc. Most of the major religions have their own similar movements, but have been held at bay because of multi-cultural linkages suppressing the most extreme versions of these memes. In Europe's case, the memory of the Thirty Years' War. But Islam is a much younger religion and takes the form of unification of Church and State, sort of where Europe was 400 years ago.
I think Obama's background of living in Indonesia is one of the most valuable things we've got going for us in this situation. Other than that, he is as American as any President in word and deed. If these difficult operations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, etc. can be dealt with successfully, he's the guy to do it.

Again, the thread title is a fabrication, it is a mis-statement and mis-direction of what is going on.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 05:29 PM

I agree that Obama, aside from his unique personal history and his racial profile, is pretty much a "standard" American president and is acting like one so far.

*****

Eric Margolis has spent the last 30 years traveling to Pakistan, Afghanistan, Baltistan, Waziristan, the Siachen Glachier region, Kashmir, the Northwest Frontier areas of Pakistan and India, Tibet, etc, and he is intimately acquainted with many of the principal military and political commanders in that region. He has been on numerous warfronts, bivouaced with the troops, and has friends among the commanders of, for example, the Pakistani Army and the Mujahedin, Taliban, and many other such factions. He knows what is motivating them.

He states unequivocally in his writings that a large majority of the Muslim fighters who are fighting both India and the West in those regions are NOT religious fundamentalists of the kind typically caricatured in the West, and are not opposed to modernization and/or democratization of their societies. They are nationalists. The more extreme Muslim fundamentalists who are the chosen "boogeymen" of western media (since they serve a great propaganda purpose for furthering the War on Terror) are a distinct minority among those Muslims willing to fight to get India out of Kashmir and the West out of the various occupied Muslim lands. It is incorrect to characterize the conflict as one between extreme Muslim fundamentalism and western democracy. That's not what it is. It is a fight of Muslim nationalist independence movements vs. western colonialism and western-dominated proxy governments...plus it is the ongoing bitter struggle between India and Pakistan, which is in fact the most dangerous part of the conflict by far, because India and Pakistan have a large number of nuclear weapons, and could use them on one another at any time if things get out of hand....which they well may.

If so, it will immediately kill millions and injure perhaps a hundred million more...and that will just be the beginning.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Peter T.
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 05:46 PM

While I agree with some of this, I think "western dominated proxy governments" skates over a whole mass of internal complexities -- is Saudi Arabia western dominated? -- unless the whole toxic mess of modernisation is to be labelled "western" (for which good arguments could be made I suppose), and the Saudis are at the heart of things (funding Wahabist sects among other things).   Oil and the Israeli-Palestinian issue are in here too.   I think it could be argued that many of the nationalist Muslim groups may be interested in some kinds of "modernization" -- or repelled by them -- but "democratization" may be just another word for getting rid of the tyrants at the top (cf. Iran's original revolution and where it is now).   I think it is a bit much to say that the large majority of Muslim fighters are (i) nationalistic; (ii) modernizers; and (iii) democratic -- all three at once? Does he have an example? I can only think of the Egyptian Brotherhood, and they could only be very marginally considered democratic (one of three), rhetorically and practically.   The fact that virtually all of the main Muslim countries are run by tyrants does not necessarily mean that their opponents are benign nationalist, democratic, modernists.

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 08:14 PM

Your points are well taken, Peter. I was indeed summing things up in a very general and sketchy sense in my last post. For some interesting reading which will flesh out much better what I am talking about, there are a couple of books out by Eric Margolis which go into this subject in great depth.

I think there is a genuine desire on the part of the majority of Muslim populations almost everywhere to modernize, democratize, improve public education, and get rid of various oppressive local rulers and also get rid of foreign intervention in their countries. To do that is way easier said than done, needless to say. It seems to be the impossible dream. In Afghanistan, for example, the Mujahedin who defeated the Soviets were divided into at least 7 different factions, and they all soon began fighting with each other, to the deep disillusionment of many of the fighters who had gone there from across the Muslim world to liberate Afghanistan from the Soviets. Many of those fighters gave up on Afghanistan in disgust at that point and went instead to fight in Kashmir against the Indian Army. Of those who stayed in Afghanistan, the Taliban faction eventually won out over most of the others (although they never defeated the "northern alliance" in the Northeast of the country). The Taliban could not have succeeded in this, had they not been greatly assisted by Pakistan intelligence and military services who sponsored them. The Pakistanis did that for their own particular reasons (mostly in regards to opposing Russian ambitions in the region), but not for the purpose of promoting Islamic fundamentalism. It was a very complicated situation. The Taliban, for purely religious reasons, decided to shut down the entire opium trade in Aghanistan and reduced it to a trickle (other than in the "northern alliance" part, where it flourished)...they were congratulated for this by the USA which considered them an ally at that time, and they (the Taliban) were given considerable financial assistance by the USA. Only later when they decided to award the contract to build a major oil and gas pipeline (from the Caspian area through Afghanistan to Pakistan) to a Latin American Company instead of to a USA-based company did the USA decide that the Taliban were "bad guys". That was when plans began to be formulated to attack Afghanistan, because they had not cooperated with the USA's energy plans in that area. That was considerably prior to 911, but 911 provided the perfect and timely excuse to launch the attack.

The man, by the way, who advised the Taliban to give that contract to the Latin American firm was..........Osama Bin Laden. He was seen as a hero in Afghanistan, because of the very active part he had taken in fighting the Soviets in the 80s, and it was his influence there that caused them to reject the American offer to build the pipeline in favor of a Latin American offer to do the same.

That is why the USA went after the Taliban, in my opinion. They were not doing business in a way that pleased the USA. That's also why the USA decided to put Saddam out of business, by the way. Nothing speaks louder than who gets energy contracts when it comes to American wars.

***

The Saudi royal family (which is a very LARGE extended family with God knows how many princes...you can have a lot of sons when you have a great many wives...) is in it for their own gain. Due to that, they play ball with the USA. At the same time they also fund Islamic extremism....as long as it takes effect outside their own borders...preferably as far away as possible from Saudi Arabia. Margolis talks about this a fair bit in his books. It seems that the Saudi royal family likes to play both ends against the middle, promoting instability in other places, enforcing strict obedience at home....posing as the "good ally" to the USA, but posing as the "guardian of the faith" by being the home of Islam's holiest shrines in Mecca and Medina.

It's a pretty devious approach to politics, isn't it?

Anyway have a look at Margolis' books. They're very interesting, and not hard to find at larger bookstores.

Anything I've said here is a mere fragment of what you'll find in those books.

I don't talk about any of this because I think what I say will make a darned bit of difference. ;-) I just talk about it, because I'm interested in it. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 08:44 PM

The US government props up many dictatorial regimes around the world as a part of US imperialism. The governments of Saudi Arabia and Egypt being two of them. A lot of the animus of Muslims around the world toward the US is a response to that.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 09:06 PM

Eric Margolis also talks about the revolutionary movements that have long fought the dictatorship in Egypt and been ruthlessly suppressed. I recommend that you check out his books too, Carol.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 09:19 PM

Thanks, LH.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Peter T.
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 09:52 PM

Like I said, the Egyptian Brotherhood.   

Muslim countries are so varied, it is hard to judge. Still, they do seem to play out the truth that without a Reformation that separates church from state, authoritarianism buttressed by religion eventually takes over (in spite of the hopes of liberal Muslims, a number of whom I have had dealings with over the years, and had long discussions about the benignness of various historic regimes and interpretations of Koranic teachings; and, now that I tot them up, all of them have turned bitter later in life or have left their hopes and in many cases their families and friends behind them). Karl Popper appears to have been right: the only truly healthy political systems are ones that allow for mistaken regimes to be dethroned peacefully, and religious regimes are unable to admit mistakes because their legitimacy is unchallengeable by definition.   

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 10:03 PM

Maybe you're right about that, Peter.

What do you think of the Dalai Lama's regime and those that preceded it in Tibet?

I think that many other types of regimes besides religious ones have proven equally incapable of admitting mistakes because their legitimacy likewise was unchallengeable by definition. Certainly this has been the case with pretty well every dictatorship that ever existed, whether or not it functioned under the definition of a "religious" administration. As for communism as practiced under the Soviets or the Maoists, I think it IS a state religion, albeit one that does not admit to a "God", but one that instead erects human and political gods in the place of spiritual ones.

As for non-dictators who must face a periodic vote which may vote them out of office...they very rarely admit their mistakes either, but usually go on believing they were right even after they've been turfed out of office. ;-) The saving grace is...they CAN be turfed out of office.

As you say "the only truly healthy political systems are ones that allow for mistaken regimes to be dethroned peacefully".

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 10:31 PM

It wasn't the lack of a reformation that ended the democratic government in Iran. It was a CIA backed coup. There is no way for us to know if the dictatorial regimes that are being propped up by the US in countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia would have been able to do what they've done without the help of the US. I don't think we can say whether or not Muslim countries would have the tendency you describe, Peter, in the absence of Western interference, because they have been subject to Western interference since the 1800s. We can't say we know what they would be like without such interference because there is no way to know this.

By the way, Islam has gone through a reformation period, but as with Christianity in the US, and Judaism in Israel, there are extremists who want things to move in a more fundamentalist direction.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Riginslinger
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 10:33 PM

"What do you think of the Dalai Lama's regime and those that preceded it in Tibet?"

                  One only has to look at the way religion is practiced in Tibet.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 10:50 PM

Meaning?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Art Thieme
Date: 03 Jan 10 - 11:35 PM

This thread is f......g depressing.

Bottom line: We blew it again! The single payer idea is dead.

None of what any of you have said here matters at all. What matters is how what is done plays out and impacts on the lives of real PEOPLE!!!

In the meantime, we who partake in the healthcare system of the USA, as it is, and as whatever it morphs into, will live or die with the consequences as the morons and the geniuses fight it out.

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: pdq
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 11:55 AM

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have."             ~   Barry Goldwater

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Amos
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 11:58 AM

In reference to my prediction on 3 December 08 (one year and a bit ago):

"Monday, January 4, 2010; 11:11 AM

WASHINGTON -- An unexpectedly strong report on manufacturing activity Monday bolstered confidence that the nation's factories will help sustain an economic recovery.

The Institute for Supply Management, a trade group of purchasing executives, said its manufacturing index read 55.9 in December after 53.6 in November. A reading above 50 indicates growth.

That is the fifth straight month of expansion and the highest reading for the index since April 2006. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters had expected a reading of 54.3. "

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 12:43 PM

"An armed forces big enough to fight off anyone in the world is big enough to be a threat toward everyone in the world." - George Coventry

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: pdq
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 01:02 PM

"The government is best which governs least" ~ Thomas Jefferson

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 01:25 PM

Okay... ;-) Let's tell everyone in the government to just go and vacation on the beach from now on, then. They can spend their salary having fun and getting drunk from now on instead of working. Forget about legislation. Forget about maintaining the roads, the police, the schools, the fire department, the libraries, the parks, the waterworks, the hydro, and medicare. Forget about everything. Let it all just take care of itself somehow. We'll all be better off, right?

I can hardly wait for this "least government" paradise to arrive, can you?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 01:34 PM

LH, I hate to break it to you, but that's pretty much what they've been doing for a long time. Except for the war profiteering. They've put a lot of energy into that.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 01:37 PM

Yeah, I know, Carol. That's why I bent down and kissed the ground when I returned to Canada in 1969 after 10 years of living in the USA... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: pdq
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 01:52 PM

"...maintaining the roads, the police, the schools, the fire department, the libraries, the parks, the waterworks, the hydro..."

That is what government is intended to do. Also protect our borders from drug smugglers and other illegal entrants, including Muslim jihadists.

In the last 20 years there have been cuts in fire departments, police and park mantainance to pay for unconstitutional social programs. The bridges and hiways are crumbling. Get back to basics and stop spending our kid's future on make-work BS jobs and local pork projects that do nothing but get worthless politicians elected.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 02:05 PM

How are social programs unconstitutional, pdq?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 05:17 PM

"That is what government is intended to do."

Hallelluia! I had been hoping to get some kind of acknowledgement from you, pdq, that the government serves some kind of useful purpose and is not wholly evil and an eternal enemy of the public good. Thank you!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Bobert
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 05:33 PM

So government isn't supposed to be into no social programs??? Hmmmmm??? How about the thousands of pages of laws that protect polluters, monopolies, money lauderers (credit default swap schemes), exploiters, userers and general corporate thugs against the working class??? Guess those laws don't count as social programs becuase they only benefit the rich???

No, what we have is the biggest welfare state ever imagined with 5% of the people controlling 80% of the wealth and these same people use the government to corral more and more of the wealth to the point now where most of the Baby Boomers have been fleeced and now see that retirement isn't something that is in the cards for them...

Heaven help the next generation if the governemnt continues to pour welfare (thru bad laws) onto the rich...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 05:34 PM

The reason there have been cuts in many essential services in the last few decades is simple. The existing financial system which is built upon an ever-expanding false money bubble created through fractional reserve lending policies has effectively bankrupted our entire society...and we are seeing the inevitable cracks in the facade now. So much tax money goes merely to servicing the national debt (debts owed to banks) that less and less is left over to do anything real or useful with. A dollar is worth far less than it once was for the same reason...because so many new dollars have been created by the banks doing their irresponsible lending. One wage earner used to be able to properly support a family. Now two wage earners are finding it harder and harder to do so.

We have been living in a giant ponzi scheme all our lives and it was created by lending institutions and governments in hock to those lending institutions, pdq, and that's why there isn't enough money now to maintain former levels of essential services.

You know this. You advised me to read that book about Jeckyl Island, correct? And I did. It is not the provision of social services such as Canada's universal medicare to North Americans that has bankrupted our societies, it's the constant production of vast amounts of new and fictional money through the banks' Mandrake mechanism that has done it. POOF! A bank just created 20 billion more dollars by making a $20 billion loan to some Third World country...and the bank is now drawing interest on that loan. The $20 billion sprang out of nowhere onto a balance sheet the moment the loan was signed, and the debt it created became a new bank asset...PLUS interest! That new asset can be used to generate further ponzi schemes.

That's the Mandrake mechanism. An ever-expanding giant balloon based on debt that draws interest. That's a pyramid scheme. And you know it.

To blame our present social situation on the provision of new social services is to ignore the massive elephant that's standing in the room right next to you....which is the banking system and its ponzi scheme.

Bush and Obama bailed them out. Why? Well, the government basically does whatever the biggest banks want, right? Because the biggest banks bought out the government a long time ago. If Obama or Bush tried to shut them down, they would be dead men. And I suspect that they are well aware of that...so they do whatever the banks say they must do, and the great money game rolls on.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: robomatic
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 06:16 PM

"Speak softly and carry a big stick"
                                    TR

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 09:49 PM

What is pork?
Anything that's not in my district...

          Tip O'Neil

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 10:33 PM

This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer.

Will Rogers

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Jan 10 - 10:56 PM

It's sort of like that in Canada too, only when parliament is in session here we feel like the baby's gotten into the finger paints. Less serious, perhaps...but still very messy! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 09:07 AM

It is no longer the people we elect, LH... They are just doing what out dysfuntional system invites them to do... The problem is that the dysfunctionality came in incriments... One redistricting here and other there and *then* the fillibuster being used as a daily bat for the minority to beat up on the majority... This cannot be easilly undone, if at all...

(As a side note... The money supply isn't the problem... Debt and distribution are... Wouldn't matter one bit if someone went out to dig out a new basement and found a couple million tons of gold... Unless the entire universe is on a gold standard then so what??? The stuff isn't all it's cracked up to be...)

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Peter T.
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 11:06 AM

A lot of this tripe goes back to Robert Nozick who argued (and it was immediately taken into the rightwing bloodstream) that the only things government was good for was policing and warfare. So in the US (and now in Canada) rightwingers are perfectly happy to ratchet up military spending ($636 billion in the US and counting for the new fiscal year) and throw people in prison, and support nothing else. This clearly ridiculous notion is behind all this hooha.

Tibet was a peasant state run by hierarchical medievalists before the Chinese came along -- the Dalai Lama has often stated that it was a failure and should have a secular government in future.   The freedoms the Tibetans had before the Chinese came along were more a function of the impossibility of controlling people in any real sense who live in unbelievably mountainous conditions. (Exactly the same is true of the ridiculousness of trying to control Afghanistan).

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 12:05 PM

Ah, but it was a rather charming place in its simplicity, don't you think? ;-) It obviously couldn't last.

Bobert, you are quite correct that debt and distribution are the problems. I was mainly pointing out that DEBT is the crucial problem, and we have an international banking system that enriches itself by creating massive new debt all the time, and governments that finance themselves and fund wars in that fashion.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 01:10 PM

Yeah, LH, but tiein' currencies to arbitrary standards won't chqange that at all... All that will do is change, as we are seeing, the values of those currencies in relation to the arbritrary standards...

I mean, lets get real here... Lets say that an ounce of gold is worth $35... If you only have but Y amount of gold and you have X number of people needing money as a medium of exchange then there wouldn't be enough money for daily commerace... That would be a bad thing, wouldn't it???

As for debt, it is what it is... I guess the silver lining in it is that the more money we print the less value each dollar holds and that means that all those dollars that the Chinese have are worth less... But the silver lining is that relative to it's own currency you can get more American made product for less currency value... That is kinda what the economists used to call "floating" where values tend to even out as the money supply grows in one place and measured against another's currency... Gold really has nothing to do with that...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 04:36 PM

You're not comprehending me at all on this issue, are you, Bobert? ;-)

Look, my friend, when currency is legally redeembable in something real at a given rate...and that something can be gold or silver or any other recognizable and measurable and valuable substance...it doesn't really matter what it is as long as people agree on it as the standard and have a pretty accurate idea of how much of it there is available...

Then the paper currency has real value! And it cannot be endlessly inflated beyond reason by unscrupulous lending institutions creating it out of thin air, because they would be obliged to pay it off on demand in something REAL...which means they would have to limit how much of it they create and they'd have to have reserves of something REAL to back up the damn paper money. And that would prevent them from getting away with their pyramid scheme.

Capiche? This goes for governments too, and they know it, which is why having gold reserves has always been vital for societies with a strong and healthy economy.

Dollars once were real, when they were redeemable in given amounts of gold and silver. They aren't real any longer. They're no more real now than Monopoly money is, and that has happened because the money was turned into Federal Reserve Notes which aren't redeemable in anything real at all...because they ARE Monopoly money...created by a monopoly...for the purpose of enriching that monopoly.

As long as we all go on pretending that the Federal Reserve Notes are real...then the bubble expands, the monopoly grows richer, and the public grows poorer (gradually...so you don't hardly notice it...except when a recession hits).

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: CarolC
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 04:49 PM

But the value we give things like gold and silver are just as much of an illusion as the value we give our paper money. Metals like gold and silver have little intrinsic value. You can't eat them or use them for your survival in any real way. You can only agree with other people that they have value and base your exchanges on the agreed upon value. This is not really any different that what we are doing with paper money. We have determined that paper in the form of money has value and we are basing our exchanges on the agreed upon value of the paper money - the same as we would do if it was gold or silver.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama caught in blatant lying
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 05:21 PM

An interesting argument, Carol, but I can't agree with it.

Here's the essential difference: Gold and silver and all other metals derive their worth through their scarcity and the expense of mining them and refining and extracting them from the ore (or other medium) in which they are found.

Anything that is found in nature, yet is scarce...hard to acquire...yet found in nature and also attractive or useful in some respects (which is definitely true of both gold and silver)...any such thing becomes valuable simply BECAUSE of its rarity and because of the work that must be done to acquire it.

A bank does not have to do ANY work when it creates (BINGO!) $30 million magically in the form of debt in the moment it makes a new $30 million dollar loan to someone on paper. It doesn't have to even print 30 million dollar bills or mint any coins. It doesn't have to go and get the money out of the vault. It doesn't have to do anything except print a sheet of paper saying "We hereby loan X Inc. $30 million at such and such a rate of interest for such and such a period, bla, bla...)

That $30 million was not mined or refined or extracted or printed or minted or anything. It HAS no corporeal existence. It cost no effort. You can't touch it. It's an idea...nothing more. Because people "trust" the bank (ha ha) they assume that the $30 million msut be real. It isn't.

Stuff you can create instantly out of thin air whenever you desire isn't rare, Carol...not to those who have the authority to create it...and the banks do. Nor is it real. Nor does it possess intrinsic value in its own right.

It isn't rare, it isn't physical, it came from nowhere, with no effort, it isn't fucking REAL.   But everyone assume it's real, because we all play the game.

The physical paper money that you are speaking of, is physically real, yes, although it's just a symbol of value, and we've all agreed to pretend it's worth something....but it comprises probably less than 1 % of the digital and balance sheet money that appears on the balance sheets and bank statements of the nation. There's just enough of it to allow people to do their many daily small transactions at stores and so on....although mostly they would rather use credit cards or bank cards. The amount of real paper money in circulation is miniscule compared to the phony "money" that's in play in the economy...and that's why if everyone made a run on the banks on the same day that they'd have to close their doors after 1 or 2 per cent of their depositors had withdrawn all their deposits in paper money.

You see, it's not the paper money itself that is the real issue here, though it's part of the issue...it's the fact that simply vast amounts of other money have been created by banks NOT IN THE FORM OF PAPER MONEY BUT IN THE FORM OF DEBT through fractional lending. There isn't anywhere near enough PAPER money to back up all that debt. Not even close. There's practially nothing there, comparatively speaking. That's why we have these periodic boom-and-bust scenarios, because it is just a pyramid scheme. The government just bailed the banks out of the last big BUST phase, but they didn't bail the public out. That's because the banks have the power here and the public doesn't, when it comes to this scenario....

The public can't have the power, because the public does not create this phony money on which the whole thing is based...we just use it, that's all.

The banks create it. NOT in paper money. They create it in the form of debt.

The paper money is just there so that you and I can go to the movies or the milk store and buy something with our paper money...but it comprises a tiny fraction of the enormous level of debt that's out there now, and the debt has been created quite willfully by lending institutions that are so big that "they can't be allowed to fail". Thus the government bails them out. And the national debt grows.

What a deal! (if you're on the inside track) What a disaster if you're not.