It goes against every instinct known to man and animal.
Thank you! Glad to see you admit that we live by instinct and conditioned reflex, just like the animals. The desire to remain that way indicates all the morality of a chimpanzee...ne...an amoeba, as I indicated in other posts in another place. I prefer to make the attempt to be human. To each his own.
...exactly how is it that you think the US can handle stabilizing every government from the Rio Grande to Cape Horn... emphasis mine on both
Stabilizing??? Oh! That's rich! Is THAT what you call colonizing, robbing, pillaging, murdering, and torturing now? Not too arrogant, are we? Funny, I couldn't find that definition of the the word "stabilizing" in the dictionary. Which one are you using?
Again, thank you for completely validating my thoughts and opinions. I feel completely vindicated and much better about them now, stronger than ever. You have made yourself perfectly clear. Enjoy your rat race.
Not one of those big mechanized ones, no. Or even a small mechanized one. And you are right about their dependency to an extent. However, all those things you mention are not an issue for me.
Did you know that illegal aliens get to attend college at state resident tuition prices, cheaper than out of state native citizens can?
I'm sorry if out of state Americans are being treated so poorly. Don't blame the immigrants for that. Blame the people who make it so difficult for the out of staters. No matter where anybody is from, I believe it's good that they are interested in getting an education. And it should be free to anybody who attends the classes without disrupting them. It's better for everybody. Or do you think ignorance and illiteracy is somehow better still. There are some who do believe that. I fully understand the reasoning behind it. It's a power thing. And furthermore, if you actually believe that any significant number of people are coming in to collect welfare benefits, then I'm afraid you have fallen into the same trap. That's Newscorp talking. These people come to work, the vast, vast majority of them. And most of them are actually brought in by the employers. But all that footage from the IR cameras make for good soap opera and has great propaganda value. It has people believing that their first stop is the welfare office. The responses I'm getting overall are an overt display of this bigotry I'm talking about. So shameful.
One stupid dope says they ought to revolt and fix their own country, completely ignoring what happens when they try. Guess which which direction the invasion flows then. Do I need to remind you who props up all that misery everywhere south of the Rio Grande to damn near Antarctica? Would you have liked to stay in Nicaragua during the Contra raids and long before? And is still going on to some extent? How about El Salvador while the death squads are capturing and killing your family? The Mexican Government won't stand on its own without American help. No way. It cannot maintain the stranglehold on its economy without that help. There are many dirty deals going on to keep all these governments afloat. I can tell you that if the pirate corporations from all over would butt out, we wouldn't be discussing this. This is the same type of "blowback" that Ron Paul correctly brings up about 9/11. Where is he on this issue?? If he want to discuss immigration, this is what he should be talking about, instead of the bigoted comments about welfare and citizenship. So if you don't want them going to the states, at the very least leave them in peace at home. I hope that's not too much to ask. But the states won't do that. That want to wages to stay low. That need the immigrants there to keep lettuce at less than ten dollars a head. I can guarantee you they would rather stay home with their families, and work their own farms or whatever, but the Americans won't let them. They want their stuff for nothing. So please, sir, try to understand why this is really happening instead of simply believing what's being spoon fed by FOX! If you want them to respect your border, you should at least show the same respect for theirs, no?
No sir. I repeat. He's no good, for the states, or anywhere north and south. He wants to give BIGCO a free ride, and he's playing the same game as all the rest. And I can make a bigoted comment about him, too in saying it's no surprise that he's from Texas, the same state that gave us that rat bastard LBJ and both Bushes, and the likes of "Good Time Charlie"*. To me that speaks volumes.
Few things are more worthless than money(of course not having any, I wouldn't know). And that paper stuff isn't even very good for butt wipe. I have a trade(with a license to practice it an' everything), a hammer and a screwdriver. And I know which end of the screwdriver to hit, unlike many of you city boys. I'm not the least bit worried.
All those possessions will probably be stolen before they have any chance to trade with the farmers. And yes they are quite neighborly. Say all the nasty things you want. And as primitive as our infrastructure may appear to you, it actually is a bit more robust. I only need to point out the differences between Hurricanes Wilma and Katrina to make my point. Even most of the palapas withstood better than those fancy townhouses did when Wilma went whizzing through Florida, and it killed more people in Florida. Pretty obvious when you take into account that nobody died from that storm in Mexico. Now Chiapas was a completely different story. Their infrastructure is totally a "fair weather friend". But people came to their aid instead of just rounding them up. As nasty as it was, I consider it better than what happened to New Orleans. Truly inexcusable that was. But watching those rivers was truly impressive. You could feel the power just standing close by, just the noise was something you can't imagine, going on for weeks! And I bet it would have done just as much damage to an American town. It's really just an example of what can happen when people get complacent over a period of time, no matter where they are. Self sufficiency has its benefits, even if luxury isn't always one of them. Little by little I'm getting there, and I should be able to even keep my connection up in all but the worst of times. Having a couple of hectares sure would be nice though. Someday...
How about I go do the donkey cart and beans thing when the "fragile infrastructure" actually crumbles on me?
I wouldn't know in your case. I see plenty of them. I can always hitch a ride out of town. No biggie. But you have just shown what I'm talking about. What is your plan? A bomb shelter with a cache of weaponry? Have fun. Haven't you already noticed how easy it is to completely shut down the entire air traffic control system? Or the post office? Did you notice how easy it is to knock out the power in almost 25% of the whole country? A little ice storm comes through and some places will go weeks without. Look what Katrina did. What more evidence do you need? Personally I find your energy situation quite humorous. I've been watching since 1973 how crazy that can get. Expect more of the same since you still have little alternative. No lessons learned there. 1979, same thing, different year. Again the message went unheeded. For me it was great back then. The streets of Los Angeles were finally made safe by the lack of traffic. So I was able to bicycle all around town without a care in the world. I could ride all the way from Inglewood to Malibu with out ever getting sideswiped. Man! it was nice! I hope you didn't get nailed by the E-coli in your spinach. Or your dog, if you have one, by the pet food poisoning. Your food situation is getting worse. I can see it from here. You should keep a more watchful eye. If you thought the gas lines were long...Well, let's just hope you don't need what's left of your national guard to airlift of few tons of rice. You won't have the luxury of tortillas, much less some good salsa. Now, I'm just talking about the states where at least you have sufficient space to grow food, but where getting it out can be a problem, but not an intractable one. The unfortunate part is now the family farm is almost extinct. So they will be at the mercy of Monsanto. Thing is they already are. Not good by any means. Where a nationwide crop can be wiped out by a single bug. Imagine what it will be like in a place like Malaysia, where everything must be shipped in. What's Japan going to do? I can guarantee it won't be pretty. Some of those things you consider "benefits", I don't. I have peace of mind. That overrules any desire for an iPod in a Humvee by a long shot. I don't need that stuff to get laid. I feel very secure and am living quite well. And the weather sure is nice.
When a law exists to protect freedom, I will always stand up for it. There's no inconsistency there. These laws do just the opposite and deserve nothing but contempt. They exist solely for the benefit of a select group. In the case you brought up, the merchants that sell pillaged goods stolen from far off lands, and they diminish respect for the other laws. So you are off base. On the other hand I know how to show respect to others without the need for written law. Do you? Or do I need to put a gun to head head to get you to leave me alone whether you are part of my "tribe" or not? So I can accept that there should be no need for any of it. But I'll also accept those that protect one's essential freedom to live and die peacefully for now. At the same time I do believe they only need to exist to reign in our animal instincts until all individuals can do it without them. Most importantly they must be applied absolutely equally to all, without exception. Otherwise they are meaningless.
All that other stuff you posted describes little more than animal evolution. Humans marking their territory are no different from the animals, except for humans to do it is illogical. Animals have to follow their food. Humans can take it where ever they go. Or they can produce it where ever they are. They can bring in all the necessary resources to do so. Not so with the animals. You seem to believe that we are acting differently from them. Such is not the case. Much of everything we do revolves around territory and denying access. Much of everything we make is to aid and abet this enforcement of boundaries. We do relatively little for the benefit of the entire species on this tiny, little, spherical rock.
You're not thinking this through and applying the proper scale. This country, and any other country, is the "water fountain", a very big one. It's Jim Crow on a massive scale. You are not going to see me defend the treatment of your friends wife. You never did. You are mistaken to think that. There should be no line for anybody. What makes you think I'm giving priorities to "illegals"? I only advocate equal treatment to ALL people, no matter where they are from. Do you stop the birds from migrating, even though they might damage your crops? No. And chances are the overall benefit outweighs the negative. Same goes for humans. Why won't you give them the same rights you give to animals? In fact check out the design of the Alaska Pipeline. They designed it specifically to stay out of the way. We are doing precisely the opposite to humans. 90% of all human endeavors is spent on exclusion with all the fences and walls and enforcement infrastructure involved. Such a waste. We are more territorial than the animals are. Really it's the same, we mark our territory like a damn dog, subconsciously for the exact same reason. Those reasons still apply to animals. For humans, it's completely irrational and purely instinctive. The piddly legalities are so superficial. That's why I don't even bring them up.
He most certainly is. And an even bigger mystery is who is responsible for all the media attention? What is motivating it? Oh, damn, now I'm becoming all wrapped is the "who" thing. Anyway, I consider him completely untrustworthy, as shown by his voting record. I don't why you don't like Kucinich. He's a real stand up guy when it comes to individual freedom, or he's putting on very good show. I like Mike, but he's got a bit of a Ross Perot aura about him. I can't quite tell if he's all there. And he doesn't look long for this world. He could keel over any second now. I need somebody willing to insure equal protection under the law for everybody in the custody of the authorities or under their influence in any way, no matter who they are or where they are from. Ron Paul will not offer that. I honestly don't know if Kucinich would either, but he didn't knock himself off the list the way Paul has. Kucinich has a bit of a protectionist streak when it comes to industry. I don't know how much of that carries over into individuals. I believe in "people first", not "America first".
The exact same argument was used against the slaves. The Jim Crow reference holds up quite well. To me, the right of passage precludes property rights. In other words, nobody has a right to block my way from Mexico to Canada and back. I have at least the same rights as a moose or any other migratory animal to follow the food. When the law is unjust, I have every right to ignore it. Your argument can just as easily defend the property rights of the slave owner. The law is unreal, except for the bullets. What would be a real reason for prohibiting access?
Could this put more people in a dangerous position of dependency on a fragile infrastructure run by people without your best interests in mind? I moved away from the city because that very thing makes me feel very uncomfortable. There are very many small family farms only a few hours away by bus(couple of days by donkey cart if need be)...just in case. Never know when Oscar Mayer might quit making my dinner for me. Good thing I like beans and tortillas. And some of the home made liquor is pretty tasty too.
There is a legitimate argument to be made that Zionism has, quite contrary to its intent, encouraged a new round of antisemitism...
Contrary to its intent? Maybe it's possible that it's exactly its intent. The Zionists could be the anti-Semites. Anything is possible, and stranger things have happened. I have no idea what their real intent is, but their actions are most definitely in conflict with their stated intent. There is a strong aroma of aquatic creatures. It does make it clear that knowing who the messenger is can be very important. No matter how much I may attempt to deny it, it would be a mistake in this case. It would be similar to a closeted gay legislator being against gay rights.
Never said it's any better going the other direction. All the fences must come down, not just the American one. And I find the nit picking quite humorous. It clearly demonstrates the complete unwillingness to discuss the actual point I make. Feel free to speak up when you're willing to do that. Here's a spoiler alert. "Americans only" = "Whites only". Discuss that, please, and tell me why you feel that the statement is false. I fully expect this post to go unanswered, unless of course you can find more nits. However, a logical response will be considered extremely interesting. You just might be able to convince me. You'll never know until you try. Please note that simply stating "because everybody else does it" will not be considered at all. I can't remember how many times I tried that with my parents. It didn't work then. It certainly won't work now. Give me real justification. And like my math teacher said, "Show your work."
I am referring to the signs that used to be placed by public water fountains, etc. It's the thought, not the exact words. To deny access due to place of birth is exactly, precisely the same as doing so due to skin color, gender, etc. It's bigotry. There is no other way to look at it. But the bigots choose to remain blind to that fact. Thanks for picking the nits out of my hair to avoid discussing the issue. And just so you know, escaped slaves were frequently denied citizenship also, probably for breaking the law. If they would have just followed procedure and stayed on the plantation until the war was over...
Well, that would make a real horse race. Then maybe a Gravell/Kucinich ticket could work out. I need to hear some arguments against his positions. Logical ones. Not some rant from Newscorp drones. Could you point me to some? I heard him talk once. For some reason he reminds me of Art Bell. I didn't find that too comforting. He seems a bit eccentric. One thing for sure, he's no worse than any of the others. If he adopted the same position on 9/11 as Ron Paul, for instance, I would know he's on the right track in that department. I don't have sufficient information to make an informed choice. He pushes most of the right buttons so far. If he truly believes in EQUAL freedom and justice for ALL, without exception, not just some sub-group, he could get my nod. But let's face facts, with today's mentally, as expressed by the moderation of my very first comment on the article, he has a snowball's chance in hell of winning anything. The fix is in. The machine is churning away. The only democrat with any real cajones is not in Washington. He's the Mayor of Chicago. But he wouldn't get my vote either. Unless chutzpah was the only issue in the table.
Obama?? That bum voted for the renewal of the patriot act! I want to know what he gets in return. No freedom lover is he! Nuff said about him. Kucinich is the only democrat worth a second look.
One's mere existence makes them qualified from a human being's point of view. A political animal might feel differently. Any money issues should be taken out of the employers hide. The exploitation rides purely on their shoulders. They are the ones dodging the taxes, while the workers get paid subhuman wages and work in subhuman conditions.
Which is why there are no massive offshore spam server farms, piracy groups, or other such activities?
I believe those groups have some mighty big backers. The "piracy" groups, for example, are insuring market share for the ??AAs and big software companies where none would exist without it. And the producers are getting kickbacks from it as the authorities shake down the "pirates". The corruption goes all the way to the top. The pharmaceuticals derive some benefit from the spammers, there can be no doubt. To believe otherwise is to see not even half of the story. Rwanda? How long will your servers last before machete wielding Tutsis or Hutus come tear the place down? The hired help put into place to protect them will want control of it also, if they want to keep that protection. Russia and China will come around as soon as the states offer up some numbers in their favor. In fact, that whole copyright story is a non story. The content producers are looking for a bigger cut. The present situation nets them plenty already. Everybody is getting paid, maybe just a little more "indirectly" than you think, but money is changing hands, or, quite simply, allofmp3.com would not exist. Or they(Russia, China) will take over the planet and act in an identical manner. But the US must disparage them in public to maintain appearances that they are in some kind of competition, and protecting the interests of the public. Well, they aren't. The back door deals going on are insuring record profits for all those people behind the scenes. In fact, I believe all these publicly made complaints are pure show, as diversionary as American Idol.
The papers have good reason to make us believe it's all out of control. I don't believe it. Yes, the pirates* fight amongst themselves also, like challengers to the alpha male. But over all things are looking pretty good for them, and they are afraid of the internet, and are desperately trying to control it. They are the ones trying to make it a one way street where only those authorized by them are allowed to upload anything. Our only remaining hope will be community wireless mesh or cloud with mobile, untraceable servers, like scud missiles. But the papers are yelling the sky is falling so that we will give up even more to the authorities. The stories about lumber and steel are smokescreens so we don't get mad over the price fixing that is really being done. All this needless complexity of giving a different name to the word "skimming" is really unnecessary. All they need to do is skim a little deeper into the service provider's river of money, and the providers can adjust their prices accordingly. But the control factor is very important to keep anybody from peeking into the smoke filled rooms where the dirty deals are being made. Any attempt to clear the smoke will meet with strong resistance.
It is fruitless to discuss any disagreement amongst the major power players here, as there really isn't any. I believe everything is going rather smoothly, with the possible exception of the control issue(as long as we remain on the wire, that's not a real issue either), despite what the screaming ninnies are all yelling about in the mass media.
*the real ones, the ones who make the rules. The ones people vote for to make the system work. The small timers you hear about in the news are insignificant fleas. They are "off the books" distributors. They are one reason that this and this happen virtually every single year.
From wiki: He has expressed concerns that welfare and other aid programs have made the US a magnet for illegal aliens, and that uncontrolled immigration is increasing welfare payments and exacerbating the strain on an already highly unbalanced federal budget.
Paul believes that all immigrants should be treated fairly and equally under the law through a "coherent immigration policy." He has spoken strongly against amnesty for illegal immigrants because it undermines the rule of law and grants pardons to lawbreakers. Paul voted "yes" on the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorizes the construction of an additional 700 miles of double-layered fencing between the U.S and Mexico.
Paul also believes that children born in the United States to illegal aliens should not be granted automatic citizenship. He has called for a Constitutional amendment to revise the Fourteenth Amendment, to "end automatic birthright citizenship" in order to address welfare issues.
Typical redneck Newscorp attitude. Right up there with O'Reilly. He is no better than anybody.
On immigration, and the treatment of "non-citizens", he's a damn racist. He can take that long walk off the short pier also. Feel free to spew all you want about the "necessity" of controlling the borders. I know why they exist.
Slashdot Mirror
It goes against every instinct known to man and animal.
...exactly how is it that you think the US can handle stabilizing every government from the Rio Grande to Cape Horn... emphasis mine on both
Thank you! Glad to see you admit that we live by instinct and conditioned reflex, just like the animals. The desire to remain that way indicates all the morality of a chimpanzee...ne...an amoeba, as I indicated in other posts in another place. I prefer to make the attempt to be human. To each his own.
Stabilizing??? Oh! That's rich! Is THAT what you call colonizing, robbing, pillaging, murdering, and torturing now? Not too arrogant, are we? Funny, I couldn't find that definition of the the word "stabilizing" in the dictionary. Which one are you using?
Again, thank you for completely validating my thoughts and opinions. I feel completely vindicated and much better about them now, stronger than ever. You have made yourself perfectly clear. Enjoy your rat race.
Not one of those big mechanized ones, no. Or even a small mechanized one. And you are right about their dependency to an extent. However, all those things you mention are not an issue for me.
...please ignore my comments.
:-)
Your wish is my command
Did you know that illegal aliens get to attend college at state resident tuition prices, cheaper than out of state native citizens can?
:-)
I'm sorry if out of state Americans are being treated so poorly. Don't blame the immigrants for that. Blame the people who make it so difficult for the out of staters. No matter where anybody is from, I believe it's good that they are interested in getting an education. And it should be free to anybody who attends the classes without disrupting them. It's better for everybody. Or do you think ignorance and illiteracy is somehow better still. There are some who do believe that. I fully understand the reasoning behind it. It's a power thing. And furthermore, if you actually believe that any significant number of people are coming in to collect welfare benefits, then I'm afraid you have fallen into the same trap. That's Newscorp talking. These people come to work, the vast, vast majority of them. And most of them are actually brought in by the employers. But all that footage from the IR cameras make for good soap opera and has great propaganda value. It has people believing that their first stop is the welfare office. The responses I'm getting overall are an overt display of this bigotry I'm talking about. So shameful.
One stupid dope says they ought to revolt and fix their own country, completely ignoring what happens when they try. Guess which which direction the invasion flows then. Do I need to remind you who props up all that misery everywhere south of the Rio Grande to damn near Antarctica? Would you have liked to stay in Nicaragua during the Contra raids and long before? And is still going on to some extent? How about El Salvador while the death squads are capturing and killing your family? The Mexican Government won't stand on its own without American help. No way. It cannot maintain the stranglehold on its economy without that help. There are many dirty deals going on to keep all these governments afloat. I can tell you that if the pirate corporations from all over would butt out, we wouldn't be discussing this. This is the same type of "blowback" that Ron Paul correctly brings up about 9/11. Where is he on this issue?? If he want to discuss immigration, this is what he should be talking about, instead of the bigoted comments about welfare and citizenship. So if you don't want them going to the states, at the very least leave them in peace at home. I hope that's not too much to ask. But the states won't do that. That want to wages to stay low. That need the immigrants there to keep lettuce at less than ten dollars a head. I can guarantee you they would rather stay home with their families, and work their own farms or whatever, but the Americans won't let them. They want their stuff for nothing. So please, sir, try to understand why this is really happening instead of simply believing what's being spoon fed by FOX! If you want them to respect your border, you should at least show the same respect for theirs, no?
No sir. I repeat. He's no good, for the states, or anywhere north and south. He wants to give BIGCO a free ride, and he's playing the same game as all the rest. And I can make a bigoted comment about him, too in saying it's no surprise that he's from Texas, the same state that gave us that rat bastard LBJ and both Bushes, and the likes of "Good Time Charlie"*. To me that speaks volumes.
*have to admit, he was funny
Few things are more worthless than money(of course not having any, I wouldn't know). And that paper stuff isn't even very good for butt wipe. I have a trade(with a license to practice it an' everything), a hammer and a screwdriver. And I know which end of the screwdriver to hit, unlike many of you city boys. I'm not the least bit worried.
All those possessions will probably be stolen before they have any chance to trade with the farmers. And yes they are quite neighborly. Say all the nasty things you want. And as primitive as our infrastructure may appear to you, it actually is a bit more robust. I only need to point out the differences between Hurricanes Wilma and Katrina to make my point. Even most of the palapas withstood better than those fancy townhouses did when Wilma went whizzing through Florida, and it killed more people in Florida. Pretty obvious when you take into account that nobody died from that storm in Mexico. Now Chiapas was a completely different story. Their infrastructure is totally a "fair weather friend". But people came to their aid instead of just rounding them up. As nasty as it was, I consider it better than what happened to New Orleans. Truly inexcusable that was. But watching those rivers was truly impressive. You could feel the power just standing close by, just the noise was something you can't imagine, going on for weeks! And I bet it would have done just as much damage to an American town. It's really just an example of what can happen when people get complacent over a period of time, no matter where they are. Self sufficiency has its benefits, even if luxury isn't always one of them. Little by little I'm getting there, and I should be able to even keep my connection up in all but the worst of times. Having a couple of hectares sure would be nice though. Someday...
How about I go do the donkey cart and beans thing when the "fragile infrastructure" actually crumbles on me?
I wouldn't know in your case. I see plenty of them. I can always hitch a ride out of town. No biggie. But you have just shown what I'm talking about. What is your plan? A bomb shelter with a cache of weaponry? Have fun. Haven't you already noticed how easy it is to completely shut down the entire air traffic control system? Or the post office? Did you notice how easy it is to knock out the power in almost 25% of the whole country? A little ice storm comes through and some places will go weeks without. Look what Katrina did. What more evidence do you need? Personally I find your energy situation quite humorous. I've been watching since 1973 how crazy that can get. Expect more of the same since you still have little alternative. No lessons learned there. 1979, same thing, different year. Again the message went unheeded. For me it was great back then. The streets of Los Angeles were finally made safe by the lack of traffic. So I was able to bicycle all around town without a care in the world. I could ride all the way from Inglewood to Malibu with out ever getting sideswiped. Man! it was nice! I hope you didn't get nailed by the E-coli in your spinach. Or your dog, if you have one, by the pet food poisoning. Your food situation is getting worse. I can see it from here. You should keep a more watchful eye. If you thought the gas lines were long...Well, let's just hope you don't need what's left of your national guard to airlift of few tons of rice. You won't have the luxury of tortillas, much less some good salsa. Now, I'm just talking about the states where at least you have sufficient space to grow food, but where getting it out can be a problem, but not an intractable one. The unfortunate part is now the family farm is almost extinct. So they will be at the mercy of Monsanto. Thing is they already are. Not good by any means. Where a nationwide crop can be wiped out by a single bug. Imagine what it will be like in a place like Malaysia, where everything must be shipped in. What's Japan going to do? I can guarantee it won't be pretty. Some of those things you consider "benefits", I don't. I have peace of mind. That overrules any desire for an iPod in a Humvee by a long shot. I don't need that stuff to get laid. I feel very secure and am living quite well. And the weather sure is nice.
When a law exists to protect freedom, I will always stand up for it. There's no inconsistency there. These laws do just the opposite and deserve nothing but contempt. They exist solely for the benefit of a select group. In the case you brought up, the merchants that sell pillaged goods stolen from far off lands, and they diminish respect for the other laws. So you are off base. On the other hand I know how to show respect to others without the need for written law. Do you? Or do I need to put a gun to head head to get you to leave me alone whether you are part of my "tribe" or not? So I can accept that there should be no need for any of it. But I'll also accept those that protect one's essential freedom to live and die peacefully for now. At the same time I do believe they only need to exist to reign in our animal instincts until all individuals can do it without them. Most importantly they must be applied absolutely equally to all, without exception. Otherwise they are meaningless.
All that other stuff you posted describes little more than animal evolution. Humans marking their territory are no different from the animals, except for humans to do it is illogical. Animals have to follow their food. Humans can take it where ever they go. Or they can produce it where ever they are. They can bring in all the necessary resources to do so. Not so with the animals. You seem to believe that we are acting differently from them. Such is not the case. Much of everything we do revolves around territory and denying access. Much of everything we make is to aid and abet this enforcement of boundaries. We do relatively little for the benefit of the entire species on this tiny, little, spherical rock.
You're not thinking this through and applying the proper scale. This country, and any other country, is the "water fountain", a very big one. It's Jim Crow on a massive scale. You are not going to see me defend the treatment of your friends wife. You never did. You are mistaken to think that. There should be no line for anybody. What makes you think I'm giving priorities to "illegals"? I only advocate equal treatment to ALL people, no matter where they are from. Do you stop the birds from migrating, even though they might damage your crops? No. And chances are the overall benefit outweighs the negative. Same goes for humans. Why won't you give them the same rights you give to animals? In fact check out the design of the Alaska Pipeline. They designed it specifically to stay out of the way. We are doing precisely the opposite to humans. 90% of all human endeavors is spent on exclusion with all the fences and walls and enforcement infrastructure involved. Such a waste. We are more territorial than the animals are. Really it's the same, we mark our territory like a damn dog, subconsciously for the exact same reason. Those reasons still apply to animals. For humans, it's completely irrational and purely instinctive. The piddly legalities are so superficial. That's why I don't even bring them up.
He's a great big cipher.
He most certainly is. And an even bigger mystery is who is responsible for all the media attention? What is motivating it? Oh, damn, now I'm becoming all wrapped is the "who" thing. Anyway, I consider him completely untrustworthy, as shown by his voting record. I don't why you don't like Kucinich. He's a real stand up guy when it comes to individual freedom, or he's putting on very good show. I like Mike, but he's got a bit of a Ross Perot aura about him. I can't quite tell if he's all there. And he doesn't look long for this world. He could keel over any second now. I need somebody willing to insure equal protection under the law for everybody in the custody of the authorities or under their influence in any way, no matter who they are or where they are from. Ron Paul will not offer that. I honestly don't know if Kucinich would either, but he didn't knock himself off the list the way Paul has. Kucinich has a bit of a protectionist streak when it comes to industry. I don't know how much of that carries over into individuals. I believe in "people first", not "America first".
The exact same argument was used against the slaves. The Jim Crow reference holds up quite well. To me, the right of passage precludes property rights. In other words, nobody has a right to block my way from Mexico to Canada and back. I have at least the same rights as a moose or any other migratory animal to follow the food. When the law is unjust, I have every right to ignore it. Your argument can just as easily defend the property rights of the slave owner. The law is unreal, except for the bullets. What would be a real reason for prohibiting access?
Could this put more people in a dangerous position of dependency on a fragile infrastructure run by people without your best interests in mind? I moved away from the city because that very thing makes me feel very uncomfortable. There are very many small family farms only a few hours away by bus(couple of days by donkey cart if need be)...just in case. Never know when Oscar Mayer might quit making my dinner for me. Good thing I like beans and tortillas. And some of the home made liquor is pretty tasty too.
There is a legitimate argument to be made that Zionism has, quite contrary to its intent, encouraged a new round of antisemitism...
Contrary to its intent? Maybe it's possible that it's exactly its intent. The Zionists could be the anti-Semites. Anything is possible, and stranger things have happened. I have no idea what their real intent is, but their actions are most definitely in conflict with their stated intent. There is a strong aroma of aquatic creatures. It does make it clear that knowing who the messenger is can be very important. No matter how much I may attempt to deny it, it would be a mistake in this case. It would be similar to a closeted gay legislator being against gay rights.
Never said it's any better going the other direction. All the fences must come down, not just the American one. And I find the nit picking quite humorous. It clearly demonstrates the complete unwillingness to discuss the actual point I make. Feel free to speak up when you're willing to do that. Here's a spoiler alert. "Americans only" = "Whites only". Discuss that, please, and tell me why you feel that the statement is false. I fully expect this post to go unanswered, unless of course you can find more nits. However, a logical response will be considered extremely interesting. You just might be able to convince me. You'll never know until you try. Please note that simply stating "because everybody else does it" will not be considered at all. I can't remember how many times I tried that with my parents. It didn't work then. It certainly won't work now. Give me real justification. And like my math teacher said, "Show your work."
I am referring to the signs that used to be placed by public water fountains, etc. It's the thought, not the exact words. To deny access due to place of birth is exactly, precisely the same as doing so due to skin color, gender, etc. It's bigotry. There is no other way to look at it. But the bigots choose to remain blind to that fact. Thanks for picking the nits out of my hair to avoid discussing the issue. And just so you know, escaped slaves were frequently denied citizenship also, probably for breaking the law. If they would have just followed procedure and stayed on the plantation until the war was over...
I have recently discovered that the "dir" command in a DOS window is much faster than "Search" in XP.
/a/s
So maybe
C:\>dir *patents*.*
might work for them? They would need to to use the "a" switch because, chances are, the files are hidden.
Well, that would make a real horse race. Then maybe a Gravell/Kucinich ticket could work out. I need to hear some arguments against his positions. Logical ones. Not some rant from Newscorp drones. Could you point me to some? I heard him talk once. For some reason he reminds me of Art Bell. I didn't find that too comforting. He seems a bit eccentric. One thing for sure, he's no worse than any of the others. If he adopted the same position on 9/11 as Ron Paul, for instance, I would know he's on the right track in that department. I don't have sufficient information to make an informed choice. He pushes most of the right buttons so far. If he truly believes in EQUAL freedom and justice for ALL, without exception, not just some sub-group, he could get my nod. But let's face facts, with today's mentally, as expressed by the moderation of my very first comment on the article, he has a snowball's chance in hell of winning anything. The fix is in. The machine is churning away. The only democrat with any real cajones is not in Washington. He's the Mayor of Chicago. But he wouldn't get my vote either. Unless chutzpah was the only issue in the table.
The law is unjust. The fence says "whites only". That is inhuman. They come here to work. That is all.
Obama?? That bum voted for the renewal of the patriot act! I want to know what he gets in return. No freedom lover is he! Nuff said about him. Kucinich is the only democrat worth a second look.
One's mere existence makes them qualified from a human being's point of view. A political animal might feel differently. Any money issues should be taken out of the employers hide. The exploitation rides purely on their shoulders. They are the ones dodging the taxes, while the workers get paid subhuman wages and work in subhuman conditions.
Okay, a bigot. Every bit as bad in my book. I know "code" when I see it. He's no damn good.
Which is why there are no massive offshore spam server farms, piracy groups, or other such activities?
I believe those groups have some mighty big backers. The "piracy" groups, for example, are insuring market share for the ??AAs and big software companies where none would exist without it. And the producers are getting kickbacks from it as the authorities shake down the "pirates". The corruption goes all the way to the top. The pharmaceuticals derive some benefit from the spammers, there can be no doubt. To believe otherwise is to see not even half of the story. Rwanda? How long will your servers last before machete wielding Tutsis or Hutus come tear the place down? The hired help put into place to protect them will want control of it also, if they want to keep that protection. Russia and China will come around as soon as the states offer up some numbers in their favor. In fact, that whole copyright story is a non story. The content producers are looking for a bigger cut. The present situation nets them plenty already. Everybody is getting paid, maybe just a little more "indirectly" than you think, but money is changing hands, or, quite simply, allofmp3.com would not exist. Or they(Russia, China) will take over the planet and act in an identical manner. But the US must disparage them in public to maintain appearances that they are in some kind of competition, and protecting the interests of the public. Well, they aren't. The back door deals going on are insuring record profits for all those people behind the scenes. In fact, I believe all these publicly made complaints are pure show, as diversionary as American Idol.
The papers have good reason to make us believe it's all out of control. I don't believe it. Yes, the pirates* fight amongst themselves also, like challengers to the alpha male. But over all things are looking pretty good for them, and they are afraid of the internet, and are desperately trying to control it. They are the ones trying to make it a one way street where only those authorized by them are allowed to upload anything. Our only remaining hope will be community wireless mesh or cloud with mobile, untraceable servers, like scud missiles. But the papers are yelling the sky is falling so that we will give up even more to the authorities. The stories about lumber and steel are smokescreens so we don't get mad over the price fixing that is really being done. All this needless complexity of giving a different name to the word "skimming" is really unnecessary. All they need to do is skim a little deeper into the service provider's river of money, and the providers can adjust their prices accordingly. But the control factor is very important to keep anybody from peeking into the smoke filled rooms where the dirty deals are being made. Any attempt to clear the smoke will meet with strong resistance.
It is fruitless to discuss any disagreement amongst the major power players here, as there really isn't any. I believe everything is going rather smoothly, with the possible exception of the control issue(as long as we remain on the wire, that's not a real issue either), despite what the screaming ninnies are all yelling about in the mass media.
*the real ones, the ones who make the rules. The ones people vote for to make the system work. The small timers you hear about in the news are insignificant fleas. They are "off the books" distributors. They are one reason that this and this happen virtually every single year.
It will go so well with my Lady Smith.
To clarify my previous post,
From wiki:
He has expressed concerns that welfare and other aid programs have made the US a magnet for illegal aliens, and that uncontrolled immigration is increasing welfare payments and exacerbating the strain on an already highly unbalanced federal budget.
Paul believes that all immigrants should be treated fairly and equally under the law through a "coherent immigration policy." He has spoken strongly against amnesty for illegal immigrants because it undermines the rule of law and grants pardons to lawbreakers. Paul voted "yes" on the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorizes the construction of an additional 700 miles of double-layered fencing between the U.S and Mexico.
Paul also believes that children born in the United States to illegal aliens should not be granted automatic citizenship. He has called for a Constitutional amendment to revise the Fourteenth Amendment, to "end automatic birthright citizenship" in order to address welfare issues.
Typical redneck Newscorp attitude. Right up there with O'Reilly. He is no better than anybody.
On immigration, and the treatment of "non-citizens", he's a damn racist. He can take that long walk off the short pier also. Feel free to spew all you want about the "necessity" of controlling the borders. I know why they exist.