Slashdot Mirror

I wouldn't call Alex Jones a 'far right wing' player. I'd call him a nutcase cultist. Back when I used to read the Drudge Report page (I quit frequenting it awhile back) if a link from Drudge took me to infowars.com I had a habit of instantly closing the page, because that site is a loony nest. This was particularly the case during the 2016 election, because you're not doing yourself a favor by hanging out in a loony echo chamber if you have sincere beliefs in a thought out political philosophy. There are similar fever swamps on the left, of course.

-------------------

This is an aside, but I was trawling around on the left political sites this weekend and noticed that the main Trotskyite newspaper in the US is now apparently defending Trump of all things.

Shouldn't you be out on the Mall near the Student Center selling copies of The Militant?

Neither party

I'm sorry, you seem to be operating under the mistaken assumption that there are only two parties to pick from. Allow me to share some info with you. For convenience, let's consider only the Presidential election.

There are actually 6 candidates for President who are on enough (I believe) states ballots to have a chance to win the election. Bush and Kerry, obviously, but also:

Mike Badnarik - Libertarian

David Cobb - Green

Ralph Nader - Independent

Mike Peroutka - Constitution

In addition, Roger Calero, the candiate for the Socialist Workers Party, is on the ballots in 14 states.

Finally, there are at least four other candidates who are on the ballots in at least two states:

(from ballot-access.org):

Socialist Party (Walt Brown) is on in Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Wisconsin.

Socialist Equality Party (Bill Van Auken) is on in Colorado, Iowa, New Jersey, Minnesota, Washington, and is in court in Ohio.

Prohibition Party (Gene Amondsen) is on in Colorado and Louisiana.

Workers World Party (John Parker) is on in Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.


More details can be found at ballot-access.org

And a list of political parties in the United States is available as well.

seems to be fiscally conservative anymore.

The Libertarian Party is.

Weapons of Mass Destruction have been found [newsmax.com]

Newsmax? NEWSMAX? Sheesh, I may as well post articles from The Militant to refute your point. They're equally reliable.

Ashcroft has this, Ashcroft has that...it took congress and various state governments to bring much of what you claim to fruition. Don't focus on Ashcroft. If you hate him, hate him only for what he's done. There are more individuals involved in what you claim than you would have us believe, and those include your elected officials. Don't like 'em? Vote 'em out next time.

Also, according to the 60 Minutes II report, Canadian intelligence officials knew and approved of Arar's deportation to Syria. So, all they had was a foreign national that they didn't want, BUT when they asked Canadian officials if they wanted him back the Canadian officials said "naaah, send him back to Syria, we don't want him." Now who's at fault in this case? The worst part is that Arar's American lawyers are using him as a puppet in a case he has no chance to win in order to propagate their political cause when in reality Arar should be suing the Canadian government.

At least your reporters don't get their homes raided for reporting the news. I don't know of a single case where a US reporter has had their source of information seized by the police and potentially face criminal charges for what they said.

So you're saying that someone who engages is mass murder, mass torture, the use of weapons of mass destruction against his own people, and so on is not evil, just misunderstood?

There's darker moments in Anglo-Saxon history. I wouldn't say Hussein is misunderstood, but that he justifies his own actions. We, at this point of our civilization find his actions to be unjustifiable. But, take a look in our history of civilization and you'll see large moments in time that Hussein would fit right in. Iraq is simply in a different time civilization wise (don't let the modern trappings of materialism distract you), and eventually they will advance to the next stage. Now that we're the catalyst for their advancement, I sincerely hope they're able to move on to the next stage, but I fear they won't be and they'll actually go backwards, but I've been wrong before.

As for using weapons of mass destruction on his own people, the people were rebels attempting a coup. The US and other governments have done similar (see Waco, TX and the Civil War), and the US is confirmed to have used military and civilian personnel for testing of chemical and radioactive substances.

Oh, and for your information, Bin Laden is evil too. As is anyone who purposely targets civilians. Yes, that makes the IRA evil, too.

In a democratic government (of which both the US and Britain are), there are no civilians. Though you may choose to not carry a gun, the bottom line is that we elected our leaders. Therefore, we are responsible for their actions. Since bin Laden (or the IRA) has no hope of defeating a conventional military, their only way of fighting is to convince the people ultimately in charge of that military that it's not worth it. Electing a leader and designating the most well equipped, trained and funded among us to be our soldiers neither absolves us of their actions nor protects us from retribution.

Ultimately, it is we the people that dictate policy and our government - and that the enemy has a conflict with...why shouldn't they attack us? Because we have a mighty miltary force who we'd rather them attack?

..Remember that the prime function of any corporation/business is to create wealth for its owners.

Bingo!. This is exactly why corporations need to be controlled. It's not an issue of good vs. evil, it's a question of harm and benefit to society.

An example is the current shutdown of aluminum refineries in the US west. These plants have contracted for large amounts of electricity at low prices. With the current power crunch, they have found it more profitable to shut down the plants and simply sell back electricity to the grid at spot market prices.

Now this is a resonable action from the perspective of a entity designed to do nothing but make profit. But that design does nothing for the communities devastated by their decision. Not only are the laid-off workers affected, but also the workers involved in shipping and trucking the product, as well as the shopkeepers who depend on a healthy local economy.

I think it is a reasonable thing for the goverment to step in, in its role as voice of the people, and modify corporate behavior in the interest of its citizens.

While acknowledging the benefits of globalism, one must also acknowledge the dangers. When a global corporation does something like what is happening with the aluminum refineries, they can cripple whole contries, not just a few cities, and they need monitoring.

Each one of those "evil" corporations slashdot is so eager to condemn is actually owned by regular people, and they are creating wealth for average jacks and joes.

True, but if the corporations are owned by people in another city, state, or country, they are less likely to be concerned. Or even if they are, how is voting your 100 shares of Exxon going to match up against some director with 100,000?