[vyper]

Originally posted by Top Gun
So was King George III but he was hardly a shining example of intellect.

The Srub has his policy dictated to him and his speechs written for him by an army of advisers, spin doctors and focus groups. His Election Camaign was paid for by Oil companies and his recognition within the party came from Daddy's influence. Intelligence means nothing in American Politics, family background, money and contacts mean everything.

Yes but in his country and in mine, the class divide is pretty fair. In the middle east the class divides make Victorian England look good. So here we come to a question of just and unjust ways of life. At least Bush believes in democracy, while the middle east is nothing more than a bastardised version of communism where there's very poor and very rich.

Meh, forget it - people just want an excuse to bash the yanks anyway.

[Su-tehp]

Originally posted by vyper
Yes but in his country and in mine, the class divide is pretty fair. In the middle east the class divides make Victorian England look good. So here we come to a question of just and unjust ways of life. At least Bush believes in democracy, while the middle east is nothing more than a bastardised version of communism where there's very poor and very rich.

Meh, forget it - people just want an excuse to bash the yanks anyway.

Vyper has a point. I'll be the first to admit that America isn't perfect. Hell, witnessing the Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore that handed the presidency to Bush was the LAST thing I needed to see right before my first semester law school exams, but there isn't a better government system anywhere in the world.

Bash Bush if you like or bash the corporate robber-baron tycoons or bash social right-wingers (I won't mind, honest) but don't bash America.

Well, go ahead and bash America if you want (we cherish free speech and all that) but if you don't come from a democracy, your bashing of America will ring hollow.

And if you come from the Middle East (not including Israel, which is a democracy) and you bash America in my presence, I'll laugh in your face.

[phreak]

Suspending Haebus corpus isn't new in wartime.  Am i safe to assume that in law school you learned that this was suspended by Lincoln during the Civil war? (1861-1865 for all you who aren't americans).

I do think that the internment during WWII was a little extreme, but you do have to realize the prevailing attitude at the time was: "I don't want japs telling their country what we're doing".  America was far more racist then as it is today, but everyone will always be suspicious of people who are "different"

[Top Gun]

Originally posted by vyper


Yes but in his country and in mine, the class divide is pretty fair. In the middle east the class divides make Victorian England look good.  

There is great variation in many Arab States, Just like western ones. But for the US to decry their regiemes whilst funding them (through oil consumtion) is hypocracy.

Originally posted by vyper
At least Bush believes in democracy, while the middle east is nothing more than a bastardised version of communism where there's very poor and very rich.  

I swear there was nothing in the communist manifesto about that. The average american middle class family is neglagably more wealthy in proportion to his country's super rich (which the state allows to exist), than the average Saudi Peasant. It's also interesting that the ferrocity at which a politician decrys communism is normally directly proportional to his bank ballance.

[Top Gun]

Originally posted by Su-tehp
we cherish free speech and all that

ROTFL There's probably more censorship in America than there's ever been in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the USSR put together. It just goes by a different name: Intellectual Property. Where the rich get to read what they like and the poor are branded pirates and sued if they dare try.

[Stunaep]

ditto. Your freedom of speech gets you sued for $20 million for saying another person that he's fat. (ok, perhaps a bit overexagerated)

[CP5670]

Pah, the US government is rotten down to the core for allowing them to exist in the first place. It's a more formidable ememy of the people than Imperial Britain was in the 18-19th century because of its propaganda and hostile agression against international socialism. Backing bad decisions that will harm it (and its relations with the countries it leeches off of) is IMHO the only route to true democracy in the US.

These people exist because of the system of capitalism, and you will find such people in any capitalist nation. I'm ready to let them exist (for the moment, anyway) as long as they don't have much of a say in government affairs, and this can be done simply by making lobbying completely illegal. If the government falls everyone will suffer, and the government is mostly okay aside from this lobbying thing. Now I'm quite a supporter of communism in general (you might have seen some of my previous posts), but as we have seen, the cultural systems of today are not very conducive to it and capitalism seems to be the best solution for this day.

As for the Padilla thing, I am not quite sure whether I am for or against it. On one hand, detaining people for no reason will start protests everywhere (since it is "unconstitutional"), but on the other hand, once these guys get lawyers to fight for them, they have a pretty good chance of escaping and will then be on the loose again.

[aldo_14]

One of the invevitable problems of democracy is that personality is valued ahead of competence.... then again, it's better than most of the other alternatives.  Personally, I'd require candidates to have a minimum level of ability before they can stand for parliament.  sure, it's discriminatory against the uneducated, but I think it's justifiable.

[CP5670]

I certainly agree there; in fact, I personally would say that it should be mandatory to have at least a PhD and some good academic credibility in a government-related subject (political science, etc.) to be able to run for one of these governmental positions (president, congress, etc.). We want those in power to be capable.

[Warlock]

Just wonder how many of the ppl in here *****ing are even Americans.


And Skrike .... this is their hobby .... sadly ... some ppl need a reason the *****

[CP5670]

I am a US citizen but I have been supporting most of the US actions so far, but anyway I'm doing math as I write up posts here, so I do not need to just sit here waiting for more posts to show up; I still have something to do.

[Su-tehp]

Originally posted by Top Gun
ROTFL There's probably more censorship in America than there's ever been in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the USSR put together.

This is quite probably one of the most ignorant statements I've ever heard. Congrats, Top Gun!

Originally posted by Top Gun
It just goes by a different name: Intellectual Property. Where the rich get to read what they like and the poor are branded pirates and sued if they dare try.

I haven't studied IP law, and likely won't learn anything about it for a long while, if ever, so I'm not going to speak on a subject I have no knowledge of, but to say that the US has "more censorship than there's ever been in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the USSR put together" is the hallmark of a fool.

We don't disappear people just for saying that "maybe our enemies aren't so bad." Iran, Iraq, China and USSR have.

We don't close down our newspapers whenever they critize the government. Iran, Iraq, China, Saudi Arabia and USSR have.

We don't force people to abide by a certain state religion or force them into giving up all religious belief entirely. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, China and USSR have.

We don't force people to abide by a certain style of dress or force men to wear long beards or execute women for engaging in adultery. Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afganistan under the Taliban have.

So, please, Toppy, tell me again how "there is more censorship in the USA than there's ever been in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the USSR put together."

Ignorant putz.

[Top Gun]

Originally posted by Su-tehp


This is quite probably one of the most ignorant statements I've ever heard. Congrats, Top Gun!

Perhaps you should be prepared to back it up with some examples and explain why ip. isn't censorship.




The issue here is censorship, not government brutality. The fact that the methods of censorship in those contries were far more brutal than that of the US, or you don't agree with the ideology that the censorship was trying to perpetuate is irrelevant to the argument of how widespread the actual censorship is.


My argument is that there are more instances of censorship [The banning or with holding of material from public view] in the form of IP so stop trying to fish for emotional brownie points with irellevant facts.


The Point: In [Insert random dictatorial regieme here] there are a hell of a lot of books banned, in America Every book is banned if you can't afford to pay for it (And if certain politicains/publishers get their way, the only possible exception to this: libraries, will be turned into pay per view outlets).

[CP5670]

What does intellectual property have to do with state censorship anyway?

[Top Gun]

Originally posted by CP5670
What does intellectual property have to do with state censorship anyway?

Intellectual property law (as it stands in the US and most of Europe) is censorship on the poor.

[CP5670]

eh? How is that?

One may as well say that universities are censorship on the unintelligent...

[Warlock]

Ummmm wtf ARE you talking about ? IP is just a freaking concept of patenting an IDEA.

"books are censored if you can't afford them"

LMAO!

Censoered as a concept means it's meaning or text is CHANGED or not ALLOWED to be viewed.  

This is the point I've been trying to make in this whole thread lol Ppl with no clue about what they're *****ing about

Anyways .... this IS good comedy

[Warlock]

Originally posted by CP5670
eh? How is that?

One may as well say that universities are censorship on the unintelligent...

Well by his definition .... every damned thing is censored

A good resterurant is censered to those that can't afford $100 a meal.

Video rentals are censored to those that aren't members of the rental store.

[Top Gun]

Originally posted by CP5670
Censoered as a concept means it's meaning or text is CHANGED or not ALLOWED to be viewed.

Yes  and if you can't afford to pay for a book (of which a tiny percentage of the profits go to the authors), you aren't allowed to read it

Originally posted by CP5670
One may as well say that universities are censorship on the unintelligent...  

Or those who aren't good at standardized tests.


Mind, you said yourself that self tuition to a degree level is possible, and a lot of university material is in the public domain. Also, there is the Open University in the UK (you may have something simmilar) where you can get a degree without any prior qualifications. Of course if you're not intelligent, you will find the material difficult to understand, which isn't anybody's fault.


The poor being deprived of reading material because of ip. law is someone's fault and needless.

Well by his definition .... every damned thing is censored

 A good resterurant is censered to those that can't afford $100 a meal.

 Video rentals are censored to those that aren't members of the rental store.

Food (restaurant food in particular) costs a great deal of labour (both in the growing and preparation stage) and once it's been eaten, it's gone (certainly as food anyway) so its expense is justified. Books (read: books/journals/films/music) can be read an infinite number of times without the author having to do anything more. Obviously there's cost of producing the book (binding and printing) but the current price of books far exceeds the ammount of money needed to make the author a living and produce the book, not to mention the zealous prevention of the sharing of content both by the state and the publishers. That's censorship.

[CP5670]

So...you are saying that because publishers set book prices to be what you think is expensive, the government actively censors everything it does not like? (most books are actually pretty cheap; I would agree with you that most textbooks are way too expensive, but that is somewhat understandable since the markets are limited) And how is this different from the systems in any other capitalist nation?

Mind, you said yourself that self tuition to a degree level is possible, and a lot of university material is in the public domain. Also, there is the Open University in the UK (you may have something simmilar) where you can get a degree without any prior qualifications. Of course if you're not intelligent, you will find the material difficult to understand, which isn't anybody's fault.

Exactly; if you really want to learn, nobody is going to be able to prevent you. As for the formal credits and degrees, that's what the public schools are for. I do quite support your point of making some sort of standarized university education too, though.

The poor being deprived of reading material because of ip. law is someone's fault and needless.

There are public libraries, you know...

not to mention the zealous prevention of the sharing of content both by the state and the publishers

Where did this part come from? If they wanted to "prevent the sharing of content", they could simply not publish the book.

You may have had some valid points in other parts of this thread, but this simply an excuse (and a ridiculous one, at that) to complain about the US.